I don’t get the rationale on this one. Why do some folks insist on believing that the CIA directly trafficked in cocaine?
After all, they certainly had drug traffickers on their payroll (Manuel Noriega being one infamous example), and obviously they funded people like the Contras and other anti-Communist paramilitary groups and corrupt governments in Latin America - many of whom also trafficked drugs. Considering the behavior of those groups and governments, that’s surely scandalous enough!
It’s like the CTs about the CIA supporting Osama bin Laden during the Soviet war Afghanistan - not only did that not happen (his money came from donors in the Gulf monarchies, particularly Saudi Arabia obviously), but the CIA actually did fund hardline Afghan Islamists like Hektmayar (sp) and Haqqani - in large part because the pro-Islamist Pakistani intelligence was the coordinating agency for American and other countries’s funds (including the Saudis).
And not only did many of the Afghan mujahideen commanders the CIA funded via the ISI commit tons of war crimes (particular during the Afghan Civil War, when they WERE FIGHTING EACH OTHER as the CIA washed its hands of Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal), but many of the same people, along with more recent (post-9/11) additions to the roster of US-backed Afghan warlords, have become major players in the Afghan opium drug trade. Again: scandalous enough!
Why make up horrible things that the CIA/US government and/or the individuals and groups they’ve supported over the decades - or indeed, invent direct connections that aren’t there (drug trafficking, Osama bin Laden) - when there are plenty of REAL horrible things that we can and should criticize them for?
Again: I don’t get it.
After all, they certainly had drug traffickers on their payroll (Manuel Noriega being one infamous example), and obviously they funded people like the Contras and other anti-Communist paramilitary groups and corrupt governments in Latin America - many of whom also trafficked drugs. Considering the behavior of those groups and governments, that’s surely scandalous enough!
It’s like the CTs about the CIA supporting Osama bin Laden during the Soviet war Afghanistan - not only did that not happen (his money came from donors in the Gulf monarchies, particularly Saudi Arabia obviously), but the CIA actually did fund hardline Afghan Islamists like Hektmayar (sp) and Haqqani - in large part because the pro-Islamist Pakistani intelligence was the coordinating agency for American and other countries’s funds (including the Saudis).
And not only did many of the Afghan mujahideen commanders the CIA funded via the ISI commit tons of war crimes (particular during the Afghan Civil War, when they WERE FIGHTING EACH OTHER as the CIA washed its hands of Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal), but many of the same people, along with more recent (post-9/11) additions to the roster of US-backed Afghan warlords, have become major players in the Afghan opium drug trade. Again: scandalous enough!
Why make up horrible things that the CIA/US government and/or the individuals and groups they’ve supported over the decades - or indeed, invent direct connections that aren’t there (drug trafficking, Osama bin Laden) - when there are plenty of REAL horrible things that we can and should criticize them for?
Again: I don’t get it.
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/2Zx7dxM
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire