Plant Trees SF Events 2012 Archive: 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Event

 
Re CIA and DRUGS     Dear Mr. Reinhardt,

I am going to strongly disagree with the main thrust of your argument. It
is certainly not personal. Your heart is absolutely in the right place.
There is no doubt of that. And for seriously good reasons you wish
society to move forward with some of the larger world problems. There is
certainly no doubt of that either.

Yes, the CIA is heavy into the illegal drug trade. We will take that as a
given. Illegal drugs are one of the major world problems. We will take
that as a given too.

First, it is not just the CIA. All major, almost all minor, security
organizations of world countries’ are into the drug trade also. This
includes even those countries that are ‘fighting drugs’. The outward
fights make the inward deals more protected.

The drug trade has been with us even way prior to the Silk Road and the
advent of the Mongol Assassins. But how did it suddenly become so
organized and so protected? Big money is certainly a factor, but it is
not just the big money. It is something far more important.

In fact the illegal drug trade in a few instances is seen as necessary for
a country’s security even with profit not involved. The Kemalists of
Turkey insist that security get into all illegal activities, including
drugs, for security reasons only. But God help those who individually
profit.

Though it is natural for those in power to misuse stations for personal
gain, as in Lord Acton’s dictum, this natural misuse is only part of the
reason illegal drugs are so central to world banking. And it is the
biggest money maker going. But there is another inner reason making this
trade necessary for world security.

After the bombs on Japan it was seen that nuclear weapons were too
powerful. What would even a real threat of one do to an enemy? So we
needed secret agreements to control nukes.

Outward agreements seemed more logical at first blush but there was too
much money to be made in the nuclear arena, both industrially and for
never-to-use stockpiles. Going for open agreements in the late 40s and
early 50s were rightly seen as undoable. No Caesar could be too far ahead
of the money greed complex of the world’s many Cassius / Brutus military
industrial complexes. These secret non-use-of-nuke agreements were
initially brokered by Henry Luce, first with Stalin and then later with
China. The newly formed Israel was the perfect host to an inside
combining of the CIA et al and the KGB et al during the Cold War. That
group/country already had massive international connections anyway.

Slowly, in time, Lord Acton’s dictum has applied to Israel also and the
world no longer accepts Israel as the inside leader in world
secret-non-use-of-nuke agreements. This was finalized this past
September. In other words this was finalized only weeks ago.

This leaves the central internal world security power more amorphously
within the international illegal drug trade. This is why Bush in Cayman
Islands and the Swiss recently exhibiting defense. Protecting world
secret banking is now very important.

I disagree with you as you advocate going forward too quickly. At this
juncture going forward too quickly would lead to a giant step backward. A
‘giant step backwards’ with nukes is dangerous.

The pace is fast enough. I agree with your goal but not your means.

Respectfully,
Michael

> I may have posted along these lines way back, but as I believe it is
> important I will repeat the message. It is general common knowledge that
> the CIA or more accurately ELEMENTS of the CIA are involved in the
> production and distribution of drugs. The purpose is to make money which
> in turn funds projects which otherwise would not be funded. I would like
> to suggest to the CIA that they openly discuss ways in which they can fund
> their projects without having to resort to nefarious means. A much neater
> methodology as an example would be to support Ron Paul's Competition in
> Currency Act. If passed, the CIA would theoretically be able to issue it's
> own currency. Likewise, they could also support efforts that would return
> the power of issuing currency to the federal government and/or states. One
> such effort is below:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NationalConstitutionalConvention06
For updates and info, contact scott at planttrees dot org.