Interview: Why Ecuador Really Dumped Assange

An interesting video interview from R.T. America. The former Minister Of Foreign Affairs of Ecuador. The assertion is made that the reason Ecuador flipped on Assange and handed him over to authorities was that the new President of Ecuador had a secret bank account and the US Intelligence Agencies knew about it, and used it to blackmail him.

This actually makes some sense once you know that the guy was in fact the 2nd in command to the prior President and had promised to continue all his policies; yet after a “visit” from the US V.P. & “friends” he granted us “refueling rights” at what amounts to a (trivially small, agreed) military base (that is illegal under the constitution of Ecuador…) Besides, his first name is Lenin… Moreno is not your Right Wing USA boosting type…

It also, IMHO, grants some clarity on just why the Intel TLAs HATE Donald Trump so much and why the Lolita Express was allowed to run for decades.

They want dirt on every potential world leader so that they have control of those leaders. The Donald is so squeaky clean they don’t have any on him, and Putin is beyond their reach too, so they get the full on Demonize By Lies applied.

The Clintons were so dirtied up by their involvement with the CIA running ops out of Arkansas that they became the preferred Tool to install in the White House. When Hillary lost, not only were the Clintons, DNC and Dems at large caught flat footed, but the TLAs had their winkies in the wringer too… And what with Barr and The Donald turning the crank, that’s why the House is doing this nutty Faux Impeachment Process (that isn’t a process in any normal sense of the word).

I’d wager hard money the TLAs have strong dirt on Shiff (he of the bath house set will have a very dirty closet no doubt) and Pelosi (of decades and decades of graft and dirty money history). That’s perfect leverage for them to play the same angle on them. Give us an impeachment, or we “out” your dirt…

So not only do I think this video matters as it pertains to Assange and Ecuador, but I also think it is illustrative of “sources and methods” in play INSIDE the USA. All speculative, I admit.

Yes, I’m of the opinion the CIA is flat out violating their “overseas only” charter and working inside the USA to control our government for their own ends. Just too many small “coincidences” and “negative space” that only adds up one way. Likely coordinating some of it with the FBI, but unlikely sharing all of the game.

Basically, once you are in the business of blackmailing leaders of other countries and overthrowing their governments, what’s one more?…

Then, in their mind, it isn’t “And The Truth shall set you free!” it is “publishing The Truth shall lock you up!”…

Thirty minutes, though only the first 9 are about Assange. Then it goes off to the Russia-Africa Conference and other stories.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in News Related, Political Current Events and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Interview: Why Ecuador Really Dumped Assange

  1. Bruce Ryan says:

    very long podcast featuring Ed. Snowden 3+ hours on Joe Rogan. A lot on his story but some on the TLAs.

  2. Serioso says:

    “The Donald is so squeaky clean…” I’m not seeing a /sarcoff !!! The man who cheats on his taxes, tries to bribe the president of Ukraine, pays off multiple mistresses, cheats on his wives, lies several times a day, hires associates who are cheats and crooks (and end up jailed),… Where should I stop? Please understand: The Donald is a crook, and just because much of his misbehavior is in public doesn’t make it any less criminal. If you think he’s clean I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying…

  3. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh God, I set off the Serioso again…. “Clean Up On Isle YSM!”

    (Yes, the Isle is deliberate. I know It’s usually Aisle… Think island bubble..)

    I’m not seeing a /sarcoff !!!

    That’s because there isn’t one.
    BTW, “/sarc;” is the tag for saying you are doing sarcasm, /sarcoff; says it is ended…

    The man who cheats on his taxes

    Well nice way to start. A provably FLAT OUT LIE for effect. As he’s worth $Billions he doesn’t even SEE his taxes. He will have an entire Auditing Firm do them. Heck, I’m worth not much more than my house and even I “have a guy”. (Does a great job, too. Even has my signature authority on file so I don’t sign mine either…)

    Now, as someone who WILL be audited EVERY SINGLE YEAR, his ability to cheat would be zero anyway. However, as I happen to know a lot about the Real Estate Tax Code (Daddy was a realtor and I helped…including managing rentals) I’m happy to let you know there’s so many “goodies” in that section of the code that a lot of folks go into Real Estate just to get the tax goodies. No need to cheat when the law is On Your Side. Biggly…

    So could you please just not post blatant lies? At least tag it with “In my opinion” when it IS nothing but made up fantasies with “no facts in evidence”.

    tries to bribe the president of Ukraine

    And another Flat Out Lie. We have the transcript. There is NO Quid Pro Quo. None. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Read it and weep. Secondly, as the Ukraine Pres. was elected to be a Corruption Investigator / Fixer, at most you could say he was being encouraged to do what he was already doing. “Cheerleader” is about the limit of the reach.

    You really need to get out more, read something other then the YSM NYT Yellow “Urinalism”.

    cheats on his wives

    I’ll give you a maybe on that one. I looked into it a little once. Seems that when he had “cheated” it was AFTER trying to keep with his then wife, who had other ideas. After a couple of years of rejection, he “moved on”. I think he had a hookup prior to the divorce being final, so it is technically a yes, but with a BIG “but” attached that he was being pushed out by wifey.

    lies several times a day

    Pot, Kettle, and all that… I’ve listened to a great many of his speeches. Rarely does he “lie”. He does equivocate (especially on numbers and dates) and he DOES enjoy a good Tail-Twist, like saying “During my 2024 campaign I’ll…” as a joke to light up the media.

    Near as I’ve seen, he lies far far less than anyone else on the scene in DC. (Vis. Hillary, Clapper, The Lovers, Brennan, etc.etc. Not to mention “If you like your Doctor you can keep your Doctor”)

    Heck, he’s kept more campaign promises than ALL prior Presidents in my lifetime combined!

    hires associates who are cheats and crooks (and end up jailed)

    Oh, you mean the ones shoved at him by “Government Advisors” who it turns out were trying to set up a Soft Coup? (Manifort) Or the ones that were framed (like Flynn) in a deliberate take down? (Case likely to be tossed out now that the facts have surfaced).

    Where should I stop?

    How about before you embarrass yourself by lying in public and spouting the YSM Lies that they have been caught spreading (proven). Oh, too late.

    The Donald is a crook,

    Yeah every “crook” passes on an almost $1/2 MILLION / year salary… right… sure…

    In realty he’s the most honest and moral politician I’ve seen since Reagan.

    He has against all odds done more to Make America Great Again than any person in the last 30 years and maybe longer.

    Look, I know you have some kind of mental disorder that causes you to believe the tripe published in the NTY, WaPo, Huff Po (soon to be departed), et. al. EVEN after they have been caught repeatedly Making Crap Up, provably so. (Think 2 years of Russia Russia Russia… and believing that completely unbelievable on the face of it “Russian Dossier”) but at least TRY to look for some honest sources. The rest of their audience has figured this out and has left in droves. CNN down something like 60%. The Media That Lies is in full on collapse. Biggly.

    So look around, smell the coffee. (Come To The Dark Side! – We have cookies!! :-)

    Tim Pool cited an interesting article that looked at information habits of the Left vs Right. The Left side ONLY read / watch LEFT biased sources. The Conservatives watched / read MORE right leaning by about 2 to 1 but DID consume 1/3 of “the other side”.

    Now you, being Rabidly Left are clearly indoctrinated BY the Left Media. I get that. Me, being Centrist slightly right leaning, I consume information sources from all sides of the compass. From Buzzfeed and Politico to Fox and Wall Street Journal. So I get a better slice of the truth than you do. But you don’t like it when the truth breaks into your bubble. We all understand that.

    But please do try to not erupt your bias all over everyone. At least put it in a catch bucket and look at it before letting it get all over the place… Try putting an “in my opinion” sponge around it so it doesn’t get where it doesn’t belong… After all, most people know what opinions are like and that everyone has one…

  4. p.g.sharrow says:

    The C.I.A. began operations in late July 1947 and in early August 1947 conducted it’s first rogue covert operation in Roswell, New Mexico. The C.I.A.was created from the War time O.S.S. that was created from another TOP Secret illegal organization that had been operated out of the State Department between World Wars, when secret Spying was a Federal crime. The political establishment feared the operations of the war time O.S.S. so proviso-ed that the newly created C.I.A. could not conduct covert operations within the United States. So you can see that they have a long time agency history of ignoring the laws that should limit their scope, The Agency also has long term connections to international organized crime. Add in Secrecy for reasons of National Security and need to know, hidden items in other agencies budgets and slush fund accounts. as well as silent ownership in a lot of corporations. Now you get an Idea of the reach and size of the real Dark State that is being operated out of the State Department…pg

  5. p.g.sharrow says:

    Serioso says:
    26 October 2019 at 8:00 pm
    ” I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying…”
    Not only a liberal but a con-man offering to sell some thing he doesn’t own! FRAUD!

  6. Serioso says:

    In my opinion, what I said is NOT a matter of opinion. It’s a set of facts. You don’t know how to cheat on real estate taxes? The NYT et al say it’s a matter of inflating values for loan purposes and then deflating them for tax purposes — a crime that can be proved with documents.. You appear so uninformed and malinformed that you should sentence yourself to a week of reading the New York Times cover-to-cover (okay, skip the style and arts sections). It would be so educational! At the end of the week you might actually change your mind. I suggest you do this well before the Donald is convicted. It might help ease the shock when that happens. But in the meantime please realize that you have no idea how woefully uninformed you are.

  7. Gary says:

    Serioso — so far behind he thinks he’s ahead.

  8. beththeserf says:

    The New York Times has a consistently Liberal bias so naturally Serios’s go-to source to be read cover-to -cover. That’s my opinion.

  9. philjourdan says:

    I will disagree on one thing. Trump is not “squeaky clean”, but he does not hide his flaws either (his marriages and the BB tape are examples). Which is why they cannot be used against him. I would say he has “nothing to hide”, which would be more accurate, and therefore it cannot be used as blackmail against him. That is also why the Dossier was a complete mock up. They had to try to create something that he could be blackmailed with..

    But notice how the left lies constantly! And they accuse Trump of doing so. Why? Because it is what they do. Exhibit A – Sorri-oso. He could not attack you with any truth, so he had to lie. Which merely demonstrates the adage that when you have to lie to prove you point, you have no point. Sorri-oso, unwittingly (of course) proved your thesis.

    Bet that galls him all to hell. It gives me a nice chuckle/

  10. Serioso says:

    Yes, the New York Times is biased. All media are. Local news is biased toward stories of mayhem and murder, fire and floods, tornados and hurricanes. As the saying goes, “if it bleeds, it leads.” And national papers, like the Times? They are biased toward stories of pain and suffering, malfeasance and corruption, human rights violations and cruelty. Not to mention fashion and the arts.
    But what the Times doesn’t do is make up stories. They don’t lie. Yes, they are biased in what they follow. But no, they don’t make up stuff. And that is why you should trust the MSM. Not because they are unbiased but because they are truthful, There is a difference!

  11. Another Ian says:


  12. E.M.Smith says:


    That’s just so cute of you… never lies… You do know the NYT has been doing, roughly, the retraction du jour on their anti-Trump jihad, no? That we had TWO YEARS of flat out Russiagate Lies. Just amazing.

    Here’s just the first link to pop up:
    View at

    All this changed when CNN was sent reeling by a 1–2–3-punch combination ensuing from its horrendously propagandistic Russia coverage, which has seen three of its journalists lose their jobs and sent the network into international disgrace. All of a sudden we are seeing establishment outlets getting a lot more conscientious about what they choose to publish about the Russian Federation, and today we saw none other than the New York Times posting the very first retraction of this long-debunked lie that we have seen in establishment media.
    You just know how that went down, too; the retraction tells a complete story with a beginning, middle and end. The article’s author repeated the “17 intelligence agencies” lie without so much as a second thought, because it’s something they’ve been saying for months and getting away with — hey, it’s only Russia, right? They’re the Official Bad Guys so we can print whatever we want about them. The Washington Post has been getting away with telling brazen lie after brazen lie about Russia and suffering no consequences for it whatsoever, so we’ve got plenty of wiggle room here. The article passed by the editors for the same reason, but then someone up top received a complaint about the false claim in the article and immediately pulled the author into his office, yelling, “You fool! What’s the matter with you? Are you trying to get us CNNed???”

    I’d list more of them but I don’t have enough GB of space in this account….

    Now, the other thing, please work on your reading comprehension. I NEVER said it was not POSSIBLE I said there was no reason to.
    “You don’t know how to cheat on real estate taxes? ”
    Charitably misstates my position. More realistically it is a deliberate distortion (lie) to attempt to gain debate points. (As evidenced by the followon “insults to the person” impuning knowledge level.)

    Now to give some actual information:

    The loan value is set by the property appraiser, not the owner, and typically the banks only use their preferred appraisers. The tax assessor asseses the property for taxes. Not the owner. They asses, you pay. You can contest the appraisal, but that rarely works for you.

    I’m not surprised your source, the NYT, mislead you.

    Now, what Trump actually did, was take out big loans, then when a project failed, default on the loan AND NOT COUNT THAT REDUCED DEBT AS IMPLIED INCOME, At the time he did that it was entirely legal. Later the law was changed and his accountants stopped doing it.

    You may think that immoral, but it was the law.

    You still cling to this fantasy that Trump decided his own tax strategies, did his own taxes, and his own accounting. No rich guy does that. AT MOST he could be “guilty” of hiring a bad accounting firm.

    Aside to Others:
    Is this a new Serioso release? It seems to be less skilled than before, more emotive. And it seems to have forgotten past experiences… when was the last semester window? Maybe it is a new class started…

  13. philjourdan says:

    @Another Ian – in answer to the title question of the PIckering Report – no. It will stop at his cabinet. Not because it does not extend to Obama, but Trump will stop it there to spare the country,

    But it will be his legacy. It actually already is. The first president to get away with it (Nixon got caught).

    And 2 problems with your assertion Sorri-oso. #1 – No, not “everyone does it” (just another lame Liberal dodge when they get caught) and #2 – Yes they do make up stories As has been proven (but not if you still think CNN is a news source).

  14. H.R. says:

    E.M.: “Is this a new Serioso release? It seems to be less skilled than before, more emotive. And it seems to have forgotten past experiences…”

    Odd. I actually had a similar thought. I was going to post along the lines of “Serioso disappoints,” with a discussion of why his comment made no sense to any thinking person who does a modicum of reading among different sources. He’s just not been up to snuff for the past year or so.

    I wrote and erased several responses. It is beyond my comprehension how anyone could trust without verifying anything in print. As the Mark Twain quote goes, “If you don’t read the papers you are uninformed. If you read the papers you are misinformed.”

    Anyhow, you get to see the IP addresses so you know whether or not it’s the same ol’ Serioso we’ve come to cherish for his endearing sheeple, non-critical thinking qualities. I have noticed a decline in the quality of his agent-of-influence endeavors. Sad. I liked the old Serioso better.

    ~Nullus In Verba

  15. H.R. says:

    Oh. I forgot to mention that on the internet, no-one knows if you are a dog.

    My Scottish Terrier commandeers my computer from time to time. It is slightly embarrassing to read the things she comes up with. I usually admonish her with a Bad dog. BAD DOG! but that doesn’t seem to deter her.

    I hope Serioso isn’t having similar difficulties. That would explain a lot, particularly if his dog is paper-trained and has a preference for the NYT. I can sympathize.

  16. andysaurus says:

    Your time is so precious to me and others here E.M. that I resent it being wasted on trolls. Why not just post “I disagree” and leave it at that. Thanks for all you do.

  17. Larry Ledwick says:

    My impression is Serioso V3.2 is a New York Times PR shill, trying to blunt their collapsing revenue and readership. He mentions them way too often (there are other liberal rags he could refer to),if he was just trying to make a liberal point. The NYT’s article Serioso was probably referring to was written in Oct 2018 (after the election) and is simply a sour grapes “expose” with lots of innuendo but no facts of consequence. They say the examined thousands of records but do not refer to a single specific instance that is allegedly illegal. Guilt by innuendo as the NYT’s does so often.

    We have no story but if we spin it right, we can fool people into thinking we discovered something.

    There is a huge difference between legal Tax avoidance, and Tax Fraud. There is no statute of limitations on civil tax fraud if he had actually committed it, the weaponized IRS of the Obama administration would have pulled him through a small knot hole over it. The IRS can audit you for from 3 – 6 years depending on circumstances and some courts find that the 6 year clock does not start until the last instance of fraud.

    Tax avoidance on the other hand is perfectly legal, but is an intentionally gray area of law as all the big players have a vested interest in doing it. That is how GE pays effectively 0 corporate tax.

    He gets audited every year so there is nothing there or they would have played that hand a long long time ago.

  18. H.R. says:

    @andysaurus – You are completely missing the “Fun Factor!” when it comes to Serioso.

    Serioso takes hours? days? weeks? to compose his Gotchas! whereas E.M. takes minutes of his time to dismiss them.

    You are well aware that E.M. is a keyboard maniac, are you not? It shows in his typos. He types almost as fast as he thinks. It’s the ‘almost’ that leads to some typos here and there…. and sometimes, they aren’t typos but a display of playfulness. (And sometimes they are just typos. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.)

    …Okay… sometimes the typos are just the Scotch talking, but he usually admits freely to that or warns in advance when it happens in case we didn’t pick up on it ;o)

    P.S. Just my humble opinion, Andy, but you don’t weigh in here often enough to suit me. Get busy… sir. ;o)

  19. H.R. says:

    @Larry – Excellent! That was really, really good.

    Serioso should deny his dog the usual biscuit given for his latest posts. Maybe get a new dog? Subcontract to his cat?

  20. Power Grab says:

    @ EM re:

    “Aside to Others:
    Is this a new Serioso release? It seems to be less skilled than before, more emotive. And it seems to have forgotten past experiences… when was the last semester window? Maybe it is a new class started…

    Don’t they have AI-powered troll-post-generators? Perhaps this latest post was created with the latest version of the generator….

    From my dealings with IT folks who use the “latest and greatest” development tools, it’s clear they have little skill and less relevant experience in what they develop with those tools.

    BTW, how about that IP address? Is it still near Langley?

  21. Another Ian says:

    “Sundance says:
    October 27, 2019 at 12:20 am

    New York Times editorial page tomorrow: “al-Baghdadi latest opposition voice silenced by Trump”..

    — TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) October 27, 2019″

  22. Another Ian says:

    And the following comments!

  23. E.M.Smith says:


    There’s several reasons. For one, I do like the practice. It is good to have some amount of “push back” to keep you sharp. (Though Serioso 2.0 isn’t as good at that as the 1.0) But more importantly, it is, I hope, illustrative for others on the best strategies I have developed to Tame The Troll. IMHO, it discourages others from attempting the same kind of stunts. (In the early years there was a sudden flood of Carping Comments and after developing my approaches to them, that ended, mostly.)

    But possibly the biggest reason is the same reason I do Opposition Research by running “variety news shows” while doing other things. Knowing what The Other Side thinks is very useful. It’s only the tendency to compulsive insulting that I wish Serioso could get over. (The reason is simple: My “be the mirror” philosophy has ME then slowly start into the insult game… and that causes me to not like me that much… so I forbid it.)

    Then there’s just that issue of speed H.R. talked about. I can touch type at great speed. Somewhere over 50 wpm (last time I was tested, and I’m a lot faster now). I’ve completely worn the letters off about 1/2 the key caps on my primary keyboard (about 5 or 6 years old). I type faster than I can talk… SO it doesn’t take long for me to post something. I don’t really know where the keys are on the keyboard anymore. I just think words and they appear…

    Per “typos” though: H.R. – most of them are when I’m on the tablet. It doesn’t spell check very easily and it regularly confuses keys as the finger touch location isn’t so great. Sometimes I catch them, often not. The ones on the keyboard are much more rare (and more likely to be words that are spelled right but the wrong word as the browser underlines in red any non-words). As for Scotch Effects, well, there is that ;-)

    @Power Grab:

    Last time I looked, yes. I’ve not cared enough to do an “over time” audit of IP numbers (though it would not be too hard). OTOH if it were from a corporate or school campus it could still be a bunch of “entities” routed through one NAT router so the same IP.

    There’s some fancier forensics tools that could be used, but I just don’t care enough to put time on it. Serioso is relatively harmless and I like the practice.

    My best guess, based on timing patterns, is that it is someone after work, at home, in a suburb of the spillover of the DC Swamp into the area a bit west of Langley. They really like the NYT and can’t handle folks not being sucked into their echo chamber. Probably a lower level swamp dweller on the government teat. Maybe it’s the NYT reporter for the Langley beat ;-)

    ( I have a couple of other possible muse / profiles but this one is the best fit. There’s a small possible that they are my “minder” assigned by a TLA or an Open Society [insert feeding tube] who checks on me once in a while but since I’m such a small fish they aren’t a top tier either and feel free to engage instead of just silently gathering intel. It’s also possible they are a high school kid with pretensions… though that ought to have more late night and weekend traffic. I doubt it is a bot as they would be present 24 x 7 since computers don’t work or sleep…)

    @Abu Bin Byebye:

    Is that really a big enough deal to justify a wind-up and press conference? Haven’t we popped off a dozen or two “leaders” of various factions of Jihadies?

    I hope it something bigger than just smoked another bad guy…

  24. Larry Ledwick says:

    Is that really a big enough deal to justify a wind-up and press conference?

    Yes I think so but for several reasons. He is the equivalent of Osama BL for the Al Queda in Iraq / morphed into ISIS so for the radicals of that strip it is like losing you biggest General or commanders. They can replace him but will the new guy have the clout or smarts to carry on or will the disruption break the alliances and lead to internal disorder.

    It is also a nice brownie point for the President in up coming campaign cycle. Two Presidents and 16 years of effort went into trying to take him out. They thought they got him 3 – 4 times so if they get DNA confirmation this will be a big win for the President.

    He promised to destroy ISIS and in the common perception nothing says that better than taking out a leader no one else could touch.

    Last it breaks the news cycle for the House Impeachment dog and pony show, and takes the media off that message and spoils their timing.

    But it does establishes President Trump’s bonifides regarding his ability to take down opponents and it is being pitched by the press office as the CIA helped find him so it gives a win to the honorable members of the intelligence service who actually do their jobs. Might be a face saving bone to throw to the rank and file intelligence folks that yes we can work together on legitimates security threats.

    It will be very interesting to watch his announcement and see what he weaves into the commentary.

    It might actually be more important to his stature in the middle east as he was a very real threat to the official governments of those countries and a rallying point for all their disaffected radicals.

  25. E.M.Smith says:

    Looks like the speculation was right. Caught in a tunnel. Trump said they had to get cooperation of Russia and Turkey as they flew over their areas… conference still in progress…

  26. E.M.Smith says:

    Watching the White House channel on youtube….

    Trump just said two women, likely wives, had vests on that did not detonate but were killed when Bagdadi blew up his vest… Trump said he was watching it live in hidef….

  27. Larry Ledwick says:

    For anyone who has not watched the announcement there is a 48 minute video covering the Presidents remarks and follow up questions from the press here:

  28. Serioso says:

    I love it! To prove that the New York Times lies, Mr. Smith cites a retraction by the paper. What do your news sources do when they make a mistake, Mr. Smith?

  29. philjourdan says:

    @Another Ian – Did you see the actual headlines over on CTH???

    And Sorri-oso was to use those clown car outfits as fact sources? ROFL! He probably believes in the socialist Easter Bunny as well.

    Here’s a clue Sorri-oso. Apologizing for a lie does not erase the lie. If the apology is sincere (doubtful in the case of the NYT), it is merely an admission of guilt (of lying) and an indication it will not be repeated (which we know is false – they did it again the next day);

    So yes, it is a very good example of their lies. Retractions do not erase lies. They are just admissions they got caught.


  30. E.M.Smith says:

    @Serioso: They only retracted after months (years?) of repeating the lie AND the getting caught was so huge it could not be ignored.

    Then there’s that 2 years of Russia Russia RUSSIA!!! where we are still waiting for the apology for YEARS of steady lies. A point you regularly ignore. (Btw, I use your choosing to ignore blatant points where you lose as clear evidence of Trollish Behavior. Not addressing a point is not a free pass, it is a Troll Tag.)

    Also your persistent injection of emotion (“I love it”) and atracks to the person rather than facts or substance are further Troll Tags (I.e. “ignore this” flags…)

    Can you please step up your game? Just emotive trolling is so boring it just isn’t interesting.

    Just since you seem to think its a one off, here’s some more.
    All chosen at random from a search on “NYT lies”:

    There’s even enough to have a wiki:

    PC Couched as it is….

    But you go right ahead and naively believe in their veracity… It’s fun to watch….

  31. M Simon says:

    This is fairly well known (the book has been out since 1972 IIRC) and yet those “trying” to take down (disparage) the agency never mention it. It seems no one with the power (not even our President) wants to take down the agency.

    It has been worse than the mafia for a long time.
    The Politics of Heroin, CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade by Alfred McCoy – Chicago Review Press–the-products-9781556524837.php

    History of the Opium Wars – up to about 1950 – the Brits were in the thick of it with an assist from some Americans.

    Opulence and Opium: The Legacy of Harvard’s Drug Syndicate

    A nice search ==> Zapata Petroleum drug smuggling

    Another good search. ==>
    Catherine Fitts Bush HUD Money Laundering Drug Trafficking

  32. M Simon says:

    And just in case you were wondering. The President KNOWS.
    In a speech delivered at the Miami Herald’s Company of the Year Awards luncheon [April 1990], Donald Trump condemned the “war on drugs” as “a joke” and called for the legalization of drugs. “We’re losing badly the war on drugs,” he said. “You have to legalize drugs to win that war. You have to take the profit away from these drug czars.”

    Besides we learned that from Alcohol Prohibition.

  33. M Simon says:

    Also note: Neither Breitbart, nor Gateway Pundit, Nor Conservative Tree House ever mention the Drug War except in glowing terms. The Chicoms know what is going on – and don’t fight it.

    Makes ya wonder about the so called “Enemies of the Deep State”. Or even the enemies of the West. Silence all around.

  34. cdquarles says:

    “Drugs” never should have been made illegal in the first place. That said, we know why it was done. It was done to destroy society.

    To the extent “drugs” are a problem, it was, previously and obviously, intoxication. The Alcohol Prohibition should have shown everyone that the proper way to deal with the intoxication problem lies there. Attack it there. Also note that contraband can’t be kept out of prisons. What makes folk think you could keep them out of the rest of society? /rhetorical

  35. Simon Derricutt says:

    Must be over the target again to have Serioso engaging in some AA fire.

    I always figured the sudden dropping of Assange to have a different explanation, though maybe his cat would have annoyed some people.

    I did wonder why Trump didn’t absolve Assange of guilt, though, considering how useful the leaks were. On the other hand, that did annoy a lot of powerful people, and presidential power is severely limited by design.

    CDQ – good points, especially about contraband in prisons.

  36. E.M.Smith says:

    @Simon Derricutt:

    I figure the Serioso explosion is mostly to deflect attention away from the main topic of the article (that Assange was taken down for uncovering the Dirt Generator and potentially spilling the beans on CIA et. al. TLA Drug Running For $$$) and how it was used to leverage a country President.

    Quasi-effective in having us discussing NYT instead, but I’ve not let go of the main topic… Just don’t have much to add on it.

    It IS pretty darned clear that there’s a global operation to take down countries with independent Nationalist leaders and make sure the guy in charge has his dangly bits in their wringer… Looks like C.I.A., N.S.A., GCHQ / MI-6 “other 5 eyes” folks in cahoots with (or controlling?) whatever the EU uses… is busy re-making North Africa to South Asia and strongly leveraging South American / African leaders “as needed”.

    What it is certainly NOT, is independent Nations democratically determining their own directions and what IS happening is absolutely not for the benefit of their peoples.

    Then you look at who is officially out and vilified. Folks like Russia where their government IS working for their nation. Ukraine now that the “color revolution” has been removed. Hungary ditto. etc. Just sayin’…. “it’s a pattern”…

    Per Trump:

    My guess is he is waiting until after the 2020 election to do any politically sensitive pardons. Then it will be a clean up round if he isn’t re-elected and / or a larger “restoring justice” round if in a 2nd term. I hope Assange can hang on another year.

  37. Bruce Ryan says:

    I suppose you could make drugs legal if you made it difficult to actually get them. Make it street corner market easy and there WILL be problems

  38. E.M.Smith says:

    @Bruce Ryan:

    Not that long ago, Marijuana and Cocaine were legal and I could buy codeine over the counter. There was less drug use and fewer problems then, than now. We have an existence proof.

  39. p.g.sharrow says:

    The BIG problem with the “drug” war, is the profit margin is as huge as the efforts to curb their use. As their use is criminal, crime is profitable to compensate for the risk. The more profitable, the more that is available. Therefor the greater effort at suppression is needed to curb availability is always counter productive in the long run.
    The best way to reduce drug use is to reduce the profit by over supplying the drugs and reducing the demand through education. The use of Prohibition to control use ALWAYS fails because it increases supply and profitability from the resulting crime.

  40. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Bruce Ryan;
    If it were legal to buy quality drugs at a reasonable price at your local drug store the “Street Corner” sales would disappear completely. Without the “Street Corner” sales your kids would have less ability and reason to experiment doing something stupid and the opportunity for poisoning and overdose would be greatly decreased…pg.

  41. cdquarles says:

    @ Bruce Ryan,

    What *is* making something ‘illegal* other than attempt to make something desired hard to get? /rhetorical

    Again, the problem isn’t *drugs* so much as it is intoxication. Address that, and do so in the least harmful/coercive way possible.
    Dose and route of administration make the medicine or the poison.

  42. M Simon says:

    I must say. Government propaganda against drug users has been very effective. The propaganda has caused quite a LOT of people to believe drugs cause addiction. If that is so – why are there so few addicts? The notion that drugs cause addiction is absurd on its face. Disheartening to see this from ‘rational’ people. Let us try something else.

    Dr. Lonny Shavelson found that 70% of female heroin addicts were sexually abused in childhood.

    Post USA Civil War alcoholism was called “the soldiers disease”

    Addiction is a symptom of PTSD. Look it up.


    Looked at objectively some (all?) of the people we are making war on are victims of trauma. Very Christian. i.e. this never was a Christian nation (at least not since the introduction of prohibition).

  43. p.g.sharrow says:

    During the 4 years I spent in the military, most in Southeast Asia I found that people that used drugs did not become addicts, but addicts did use drugs, any kind that they could get. People that were mentally ok did all right, but those that were not got a lot worse. On the other hand being in the American military is not good for anyone’s mental or physical health. The stress level is deliberately very high, specially during the first 2 years…pg.

  44. philjourdan says:

    Not that long ago, Marijuana and Cocaine were legal and I could buy codeine over the counter. There was less drug use and fewer problems then, than now.

    There were also a lot more guns at schools (usually in the back of pickup trucks) and far fewer mass school shootings. There is a pattern.

Comments are closed.