by David G. Eselius
Colombian guerrilla group FARC, was established in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party. FARC is Colombia's oldest, largest, most capable, and best-equipped Marxist insurgency. The FARC is governed by a secretariat, led by septuagenarian Manuel Marshland and six others, including senior military commander. The FARC is organized along military lines and includes several urban fronts. The FARC habitually uses safe havens in Ecuador because of Ecuador's inability to control its border and territory, and in Venezuela, because of difficult terrain and the apparent laissez faire complicity and demonstrated support of Caracas for the FARC. The FARC is believed by knowledgeable Colombians to take in as much as $2 million a day (as much as $720 billion per year) in illicit drug proceeds.
The IRA has had well-established links with the FARC narco-terrorists in Colombia since at least 1998. Apparently IRA explosives management training techniques are resulting in more effective explosives attacks against the Colombian urban infrastructure including bridges, power lines, reservoirs, and other facilities.
Although the FARC-controlled safe haven, or "despeje" — which is situated between two of Colombia's largest coca cultivation areas — is not considered a major area for coca cultivation or drug trafficking, many FARC units throughout southern Colombia raise funds through the extortion ("taxation") of both legal and illegal businesses, the latter including the drug trade. Some insurgent units raise funds through extortion or by protecting laboratory operations. In return for cash payments, or possibly in exchange for weapons, the insurgents protect cocaine laboratories in southern Colombia. Some FARC and ELN units are independently involved in limited cocaine laboratory operations. Some FARC units in southern Colombia are reported to be directly involved in drug trafficking activities, such as controlling local cocaine base markets. A recent U.S. report, for instance, found efforts to suppress cocaine growing in Colombia have faltered. Bolivia's leftist leader (President Morales) has thrown out US drug agents.
Americans also needs to worry about a spill-over of this drug war across the border and the reach of the cartels into dozens of U.S. cities. The cartels sell about $13.8 billion a year worth of marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, and heroin to US users. U.S. drug sales, made through hundreds of tienditas, or little “medical marijuana” stores, are lucrative. Beyond gross sales figures are significant increased criminal costs to the legit societies. The real prize for drug cartels is control of the port through which cargoes of cocaine from Colombia and Peru arrive, to be dispatched overland to the U.S. and on to Canada.
Mexico's drug war became necessary since Colombia suppressed its cartels in the 1990s (however cocaine trafficking to U.S. has increased) and Mexican groups took over much of the trafficking. At the end of Mexico's one-party rule in 2000 ended unwritten agreements that allowed some drug gangs to control certain markets. The U.S. War on Drugs was expanded. An end to those historical pacts led to an eruption of battles for turf and even more corruption of elected and government officials.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is an example of world leadership complaisant with expanding the illegal drug global industry.
On July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Under the new legal framework, all drugs were "decriminalized," not "legalized." Thus, drug possession for personal use and drug usage itself are still legally prohibited, but violations of those prohibitions are deemed exclusively administrative violations and are removed completely from the criminal realm. Drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted as a criminal offense.
With an adaption of a Portugal-like drug “legalization” system within the U.S. — the elimination of illegal drug trafficking would greatly enhance reductions in crime, improvements in individual health/education/welfare, and shifts of large economic resources resulting from criminal activities (to the increased funding of productive societal needs). The largest political obstacle to “legalizing” drugs is the economic impact to the global illegal drug industry. Another factor resistant to illegal drug law reform are politicians in general who are too weak and complaisant to take active rolls in attempting to benefit human races.
Portugal's system of drug “decriminalization” does not address illegal drug production, trafficking, and criminal profit motives. “Legalizing” of drugs of potential abuse includes government regulation of drug production, distribution, sales, and consumption. “Regulation” of "legalized" drugs of potential abuse is primarily administrated though a system economic enforcement for violations of illegally dealing in drugs. It is only through “legalizing” of drugs that primary criminal profit motive can be addressed.
To “legalize” drugs it must first must be determined the character of harm resulting from improper use of legal drugs. A rational assessment of a drug should identify three main factors, which together determine the harm associated with any drug of potential abuse: the physical harm to the individual user caused by the drug, the tendency of the drug to induce individual dependence, and the effect of drug use on families, communities, and society.
In the U.S., the question often comes up as to how to handle the “little guy” economic dependence upon the marijuana economy. “Little guy” marijuana dealers rely upon keeping drugs federally illegal while promoting state marijuana sales as being “legal.” It is up to the “little guy” (who can easily have a six figure annual income from dealing in illegal marijuana) to communicate a plan that will work for everyone when marijuana and other recreational drugs are federally and state “legalized.” My suggestion to the marijuana “little guy” is get a lobby group and lawyers and start working the Washington D.C. politicians to adopt “legalizing” and "regulating" drugs of potential abuse.
America and the rest of the world require drug law reform to a system of drug “legalization” and “regulation” based upon determined character of harm from improper use of legal drugs and drug use. Drug legalization becomes much more beneficial when the government provides informed safe and regulated legal access to drugs of potential abuse. It is time for U.S. President Obama and the U.S. Congress to step back and put some common sense into our national drug laws.
Colombian guerrilla group FARC, was established in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party. FARC is Colombia's oldest, largest, most capable, and best-equipped Marxist insurgency. The FARC is governed by a secretariat, led by septuagenarian Manuel Marshland and six others, including senior military commander. The FARC is organized along military lines and includes several urban fronts. The FARC habitually uses safe havens in Ecuador because of Ecuador's inability to control its border and territory, and in Venezuela, because of difficult terrain and the apparent laissez faire complicity and demonstrated support of Caracas for the FARC. The FARC is believed by knowledgeable Colombians to take in as much as $2 million a day (as much as $720 billion per year) in illicit drug proceeds.
The IRA has had well-established links with the FARC narco-terrorists in Colombia since at least 1998. Apparently IRA explosives management training techniques are resulting in more effective explosives attacks against the Colombian urban infrastructure including bridges, power lines, reservoirs, and other facilities.
Although the FARC-controlled safe haven, or "despeje" — which is situated between two of Colombia's largest coca cultivation areas — is not considered a major area for coca cultivation or drug trafficking, many FARC units throughout southern Colombia raise funds through the extortion ("taxation") of both legal and illegal businesses, the latter including the drug trade. Some insurgent units raise funds through extortion or by protecting laboratory operations. In return for cash payments, or possibly in exchange for weapons, the insurgents protect cocaine laboratories in southern Colombia. Some FARC and ELN units are independently involved in limited cocaine laboratory operations. Some FARC units in southern Colombia are reported to be directly involved in drug trafficking activities, such as controlling local cocaine base markets. A recent U.S. report, for instance, found efforts to suppress cocaine growing in Colombia have faltered. Bolivia's leftist leader (President Morales) has thrown out US drug agents.
Americans also needs to worry about a spill-over of this drug war across the border and the reach of the cartels into dozens of U.S. cities. The cartels sell about $13.8 billion a year worth of marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, and heroin to US users. U.S. drug sales, made through hundreds of tienditas, or little “medical marijuana” stores, are lucrative. Beyond gross sales figures are significant increased criminal costs to the legit societies. The real prize for drug cartels is control of the port through which cargoes of cocaine from Colombia and Peru arrive, to be dispatched overland to the U.S. and on to Canada.
Mexico's drug war became necessary since Colombia suppressed its cartels in the 1990s (however cocaine trafficking to U.S. has increased) and Mexican groups took over much of the trafficking. At the end of Mexico's one-party rule in 2000 ended unwritten agreements that allowed some drug gangs to control certain markets. The U.S. War on Drugs was expanded. An end to those historical pacts led to an eruption of battles for turf and even more corruption of elected and government officials.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is an example of world leadership complaisant with expanding the illegal drug global industry.
“Chavez names minister cited by US in drug trafficking”
(AFP)
CARACAS — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez appointed General Henry Rangel Silva as his defense minister despite US accusations he participates in drug trafficking.
"Today I announce his appointment as the new minister of defense of the republic here in this sacred temple in front of the Virgin of Coromoto," Chavez said during an outdoor mass in Guanare, in northwestern Venezuela, as it was broadcast on radio and television.
At the same time, he appointed General Jose Gregorio Perez Escalona as the new commander of Venezuelan Aviation.
"Let's give applause to the new appointed defense minister, Rangel Silva, and the new commanding general of the Bolivarian Aviation, Major General Perez Escalona," he said.
In 2008, the US Treasury Department froze assets of Rangel Silva, then director of the Venezuelan intelligence service, accusing him of drug trafficking and supporting Colombian guerrillas associated with the revolutionary group FARC.
In 2010, Chavez promoted Rangel Silva to general-in-chief, the highest military rank in Venezuela, days after the military officer had declared in an interview that the military was "married" to the political projects of the president, to whom they had vowed "complete loyalty."
In response to the controversy created in Venezuela by Rangel Silva's statements, Chavez said the general had been misunderstood. Chavez said Rangel Silva meant he was dedicated to the projects of the country, not a person.
Fin
On July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Under the new legal framework, all drugs were "decriminalized," not "legalized." Thus, drug possession for personal use and drug usage itself are still legally prohibited, but violations of those prohibitions are deemed exclusively administrative violations and are removed completely from the criminal realm. Drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted as a criminal offense.
With an adaption of a Portugal-like drug “legalization” system within the U.S. — the elimination of illegal drug trafficking would greatly enhance reductions in crime, improvements in individual health/education/welfare, and shifts of large economic resources resulting from criminal activities (to the increased funding of productive societal needs). The largest political obstacle to “legalizing” drugs is the economic impact to the global illegal drug industry. Another factor resistant to illegal drug law reform are politicians in general who are too weak and complaisant to take active rolls in attempting to benefit human races.
Portugal's system of drug “decriminalization” does not address illegal drug production, trafficking, and criminal profit motives. “Legalizing” of drugs of potential abuse includes government regulation of drug production, distribution, sales, and consumption. “Regulation” of "legalized" drugs of potential abuse is primarily administrated though a system economic enforcement for violations of illegally dealing in drugs. It is only through “legalizing” of drugs that primary criminal profit motive can be addressed.
To “legalize” drugs it must first must be determined the character of harm resulting from improper use of legal drugs. A rational assessment of a drug should identify three main factors, which together determine the harm associated with any drug of potential abuse: the physical harm to the individual user caused by the drug, the tendency of the drug to induce individual dependence, and the effect of drug use on families, communities, and society.
Impartial objective information on drugs and drug harms to the public, to educators, and to academics is necessary. The UK 'Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs' receives no government funding so is able to provide scientific findings free from the constraints of policy making and politics. The Committee does not by any means condone the use of drugs but aims to reduce the likelihood of those who do use them of coming to harm.
In the U.S., the question often comes up as to how to handle the “little guy” economic dependence upon the marijuana economy. “Little guy” marijuana dealers rely upon keeping drugs federally illegal while promoting state marijuana sales as being “legal.” It is up to the “little guy” (who can easily have a six figure annual income from dealing in illegal marijuana) to communicate a plan that will work for everyone when marijuana and other recreational drugs are federally and state “legalized.” My suggestion to the marijuana “little guy” is get a lobby group and lawyers and start working the Washington D.C. politicians to adopt “legalizing” and "regulating" drugs of potential abuse.
America and the rest of the world require drug law reform to a system of drug “legalization” and “regulation” based upon determined character of harm from improper use of legal drugs and drug use. Drug legalization becomes much more beneficial when the government provides informed safe and regulated legal access to drugs of potential abuse. It is time for U.S. President Obama and the U.S. Congress to step back and put some common sense into our national drug laws.
No comments:
Post a Comment