Bob Shell wrote: >On May 9, 2007, at 10:27 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: > > > >>Interesting, but I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of Caracas, >>any more than I'd believe a word published in Pravda, (obviously the >>Russians didn't since with the end of the Soviet Union it too >>disappeared). >> >> > >PRAVDA is alive and well: > >http://english.pravda.ru/ > > > > >>The DEA is many things, some very bad in my opinion, but >>drug traffickers? That simply strains credibility past the limit. >> >> > >Not at all. In fact it makes damned good sense. Who would be in a >better position? And the money is just too tempting and corrupting. >Personally, I'd be surprised if the DEA wasn't active in drug >trafficking. > >Bob > >
Some dirty agents? Sure. Guaranteed in fact. The Agency itself? No. Too many chances for a whistleblower. The DEA works too closely with the FBI, State Police and the Military for that to stay secret. That said, the DEA, and the entire 'War on Drugs' is a profoundly silly idea. Prohibition doesn't work, never did, never will. All it does is provide high incomes to criminals and a problem for politicians and bureaucrats to 'solve' interminably via press releases, spending and criminalizing relatively victimless issues. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
