Sukarno was talking about a Pac Rim development bank to compete with IMF/WB. He was pushed out by CIA/Suharto, and JFK got whacked in part for a willingness to let Sukarno release West Papua/NewGuinea which would have wasted Freeport-McMoran's bribes there for a gold mine and they didn't want to pay bribes to a new government so they joined in the JFK swarm(CIA,Permindex, mob, etc).
I have Les Coleman's Trail of the Octopus, and also William Chasey's book--he went to Libya. CIA definitely bombed the plane using <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/photos/album/646081026/pic/1622\ 187828/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc> Monzer Al Kasser <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/photos/album/646081026/pic/1622\ 187828/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc> , (above, arrested in 2008) in order to kill Gannon and McKee. Benazir Bhutto was assassinated to subvert democracy and assert a Ngo Dinh Diem type of weak surrogate and then as in the US the right retreated, in Pakistan I believe the right has retreated into the off-the-map zones in order to use extremists to destabilize and make both a sanctuary and job for intel and military. Similarly the US military is being entangled in a wider war like JFK Vietnam to prevent peace and democracy and Obama's "Change" or rather his followers' notion of change. War and the well-timed real estate bubble's collapse prevented a real healthcare bill from having the funding it needs, for instance, as the war and bailouts hold us to the right, to Obama's and the Democrats' discredit in the US and the US attacking Pakistan helps the Pak right. The whole thing gets rather obvious where the CIA drone pilots operate from Pakistan, and US troops leave the poppies alone in Afghanistan. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21marja.html <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21marja.html> USMC guards 911-liberated poppies <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21marja.html> New York Times, March 20, 2010 U.S. Turns a Blind Eye to Opium in Afghan Town By ROD NORDLAND <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/n/rod_nordla\ nd/index.html?inline=nyt-per> KABUL, Afghanistan The effort to win over Afghans on former Taliban <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/tal\ iban/index.html?inline=nyt-org> turf in Marja has put American and NATO <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/nor\ th_atlantic_treaty_organization/index.html?inline=nyt-org> commanders in the unusual position of arguing against opium <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/opium/in\ dex.html?inline=nyt-classifier> eradication, pitting them against some Afghan officials who are pushing to destroy the harvest. >From Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/stanley_a_\ mcchrystal/index.html?inline=nyt-per> on down, the military's position is clear: "U.S. forces no longer eradicate," as one NATO official put it. Opium is the main livelihood of 60 to 70 percent of the farmers in Marja, which was seized from Taliban rebels in a major offensive last month. American Marines <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/m/us_\ marine_corps/index.html?inline=nyt-org> occupying the area are under orders to leave the farmers' fields alone. "Marja is a special case right now," said Cmdr. Jeffrey Eggers, a member of the general's Strategic Advisory Group, his top advisory body. "We don't trample the livelihood of those we're trying to win over." United Nations <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/uni\ ted_nations/index.html?inline=nyt-org> drug officials agree with the Americans, though they acknowledge the conundrum. Pictures of NATO and other allied soldiers "walking next to the opium fields won't go well with domestic audiences, but the approach of postponing eradicating in this particular case is a sensible one," said Jean-Luc Lemahieu, who is in charge of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime <http://www.unodc.org/afghanistan/index.html?ref=menutop> here. Afghan officials, however, are divided. Though some support the American position, others, citing a constitutional ban on opium cultivation, want to plow the fields under before the harvest, which has already begun in parts of Helmand Province. "How can we allow the world to see lawful forces in charge of Marja next to fields full of opium, which one way or another will be harvested and turned into a poison that kills people all over the world?" said Zulmai Afzali, the spokesman for the Afghan Ministry of Counternarcotics. "The Taliban are the ones who profit from opium, so you are letting your enemy get financed by this so he can turn around and kill you back," he added, referring to how the Taliban squeeze farmers for money to run their operations. The argument may strike some as a jarring reversal; in the years right after the 2001 invasion, tensions rose as some Afghan officials vehemently resisted all-out American pressure to stop opium production. Though the United States government's official position is still to support opium crop eradication in general, some American civilian officials say that the internal debate over Marja is far from over within parts of the State Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/d/dru\ g_enforcement_administration/index.html?inline=nyt-org> . A spokesman for the United States Embassy in Kabul, Brendan J. O'Brien, said officials would decline to comment while the matter was under review. At the heart of the debate with Afghan officials is an important question of cause-and-effect: is poor security in Marja the reason there is so much opium, or is so much opium the reason there has been poor security? "Every province in Afghanistan <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritorie\ s/afghanistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo> where you find opium cultivation, you have insecurity as a result," Mr. Afzali said. American military officials and United Nations drug officials see it the other way around. Opium cultivation has been largely wiped out in 20 provinces where security has been improved, and in the seven most insecure provinces, poppy is still farmed. "Nothing can compete with opium in an insecure environment," Mr. Lemahieu said. "A secure environment is the precondition for governance and a long-term solution." Although the International Security Assistance Force, the NATO force that General McChrystal commands, no longer carries out eradication programs itself, its official position is that it supports the Afghan government's efforts to eradicate, and lends backup and protection to the provincial officials, who are responsible for carrying out the eradication program. The ardently anti-opium governor of Helmand Province, Gulab Mangal, has a record of success, cutting back cultivation by 33 percent last year. But he, too, is willing to make an exception for the current harvest in Marja for the moment. "In general I've been told by my higher-ups that this year you will not eradicate there, because people have suffered a lot of hardships because of the fighting," Mr. Mangal said. "We may do it next year." Mr. Afzali, however, said the Counternarcotics Ministry still hoped to prevail in time to eradicate the current crop in Marja. Mr. Mangal said, "If they order me, I will start the destruction of Marja's opium the same day." The problem of Marja's opium harvest is being discussed intensely by General McChrystal's advisers, but none of the proposed solutions have proved satisfactory. One idea was to buy up and destroy the opium harvest, but opponents of that proposal feared that it would only encourage more opium cultivation and might be illegal under United States law, turning American troops into de facto drug financiers. Another idea was to give incentives to farmers to change to legal crops next year, while this year concentrating on interdiction of smugglers and the laboratories they use to make opium or heroin from the poppy paste. That would institute a sort of "don't ask, don't tell <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/dont_ask\ _dont_tell/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> " policy toward the cultivators and would present a thorny question: where would troops interdict the opium just outside the farm gate, on the lane leading from the farm, on the road to town? "How do you support the rule of law while providing a proper penalty and disincentive so they switch crops next year?" Commander Eggers said. "We are in a real dilemma." There is little time left to find an answer: two-thirds of Marja's fields are now blooming with tall red poppies, and the forthcoming harvest would provide work for thousands of Afghans from outside the area because it is so labor intensive. Helmand produces more than half of Afghanistan's opium harvest, with 22 percent of its arable land devoted to poppies, even after Governor Mangal's forces eradicated a third of the crop last year. His province was awarded a $10 million Good Performer's Initiative grant <http://kabul.usembassy.gov/pr_gpi2311.html> by the American Embassy for that effort. Afghanistan now produces 90 percent of the world's opium. And one way or another the opium trade supports an estimated 1.4 million households in the country, which has a population of 25 million to 30 million. It also provides enormous amounts of money to the Taliban, with a recent United Nations study <http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Afghanistan/Afghan_Opi\ um_Trade_2009_web.pdf> estimating the insurgents had earned as much as $600 million in taxes from farmers and traffickers just from 2005 to 2008. The farmers themselves do not get rich on the harvest. Hajji Said Gul, a 51-year-old farmer with nine acres of poppies in Marja, said that after he paid back loans to buy seeds, and gave the Taliban their 10 percent of the profits, he earned $500 an acre with each harvest. He is not worried about eradication. "The Taliban have already promised us that they will keep fighting the government and foreign forces until we collect our harvest from the fields," he said. "All my hopes are related to the poppy harvest." Muhammad Nabi, 52, a tribal elder, said: "It's better if they don't destroy the crops this year. Next year, if they provide better security, reconstruction and work programs, then we guarantee they will not grow poppy." Opium prices now are at historic lows, after years of over-production in Afghanistan. A few years ago, farmers could earn 37 times as much from opium as from wheat, the favored substitution crop recently; now it is more like two or three times as much, United Nations officials say. Mr. Lemahieu said he thought that provided an opportunity to persuade the farmers that if they changed to legal crops, the government would provide them with services like schools and clinics, and then they might be willing to accept lower profits. "Between yesterday's opium income and tomorrow's legal income, today requires an increase in quality of life for the farmer and his family," he said. Destroy his crop this year, Western officials say, and he won't see anything but red. Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Marja, Afghanistan, and an Afghan employee of The New York Times from Lashkar Gah, Afghanistan. -Bob http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/49029 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/49034 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/49039 nice thread. just wanted to add a bit of buried history here. in 1974, pakistan's zulfikar ali bhutto convened an islamic summit in islamabad. co-chaired with gaddafi. attended by all leaders of islamic nations, from saudi royalty to uganda's idi amin. gaddafi's and bhutto's proposal was simple and brilliant. the islamic world at the time held a population of 800 million and controlled vast resources. united they could form a third major power in a world carved up by the west and the soviets. three years later bhutto was toppled and five years later he was hanged. not long after, gaddafi had sanctions imposed on his country over the lockerbie affair and he survived a bombing raid. micha...@... <../../../../post?postID=DHiA2AC5HCO4tnneTP7Q-y3My2ggwdoRgeCGHIFmmqQzSql\ HfjAQsEK1-12X5QziTfutWPwUlTuXUqQaCnDG0w> wrote: Thanks, you made many good points. It is fairly well, (about completely), acknowledged in Africa that you cannot plop down and form of democracy. There are no long-standing institutions to base it upon. Military dictatorships work best to start. Moscow trained long-standing Sudan head, Omar al-Bashir, wrote a good piece on this but can't find it on the Internet. South Africa is an example of pushing democracy too quickly: not good at all. Islam works best to start. They have prevailed in running backward societies for a long time. Within a short time the situation becomes very peaceful. When Gaddafi stood up at the UN and said that the Security Council is corrupt, (head of the secret non-use of nuke pact), he got a standing ovation. This was spun another way in Western news. The sudden crisis in Nigeria is because we are loosing inner control. That is why Gaddafi made his `odd' statement to the effect that Nigeria had better either work together or break up. Nigeria, in some respects, has been the most dynamic holding those three strong tribes together. What is developing now is that it is working together to become one large political and banking block. A real force. Thanks. m
