Support 911Blogger


The Myth of Afghanistan

Calvin Sloan expands on his message at his new blog, The Pursuit of Injustice;

"...The Casus Belli for the Iraq war has been revealed, even by the corporate mainstream media, as a falsification designed for imperial gain. With Alan Greenspan's confession in 2007 that the ''Iraq war is largely about oil,'' whatever disillusions remained in political circles over the motives behind the U.S. occupation of Iraq were squelched...

...Before justifying the U.S. occupation to the Arab world in his speech in Cairo, President Obama reminded us that the United States was originally the victim for it had been "al Qaeda [who] killed nearly 3,000 people on that day [9/11]." And thus, the U.S. will rightfully remain stationed in the crossroads of Central and South Asia until the "violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan" who are "determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can" are terminated. The Afghan myth is inexorably dependent on the 9/11 myth.

The official narrative of 9/11 and its severe implications still stand as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy 8 years after the event. The disturbing truth however, that factions of the U.S. government had a hand in nurturing the plot, cannot be denied. The documented failure of the administration to detain the conspirators and stop the attacks goes beyond incompetence and into the realm of intentional negligence and interference. Further investigation reveals even more deception and distortions.***

The 'War on Terror,' with its focal point, the war in Afghanistan, is thus a facade constructed to mislead the public into supporting despotic, imperialist policies..."

Full post:
http://pursuitofinjustice.blogspot.com/2009/07/afghan-myth.html

Does Opium from Afghanistan

really make it's way into prescription pills?

LIkely so.

That's a very interesting question. I initially thought that these prescription drugs were totally synthetic, but apparently they require the raw material itself to produce, and this has to come from somewhere. The main naturally occurring opiates, Morphine and Codeine, have a very complex chemical structure and are difficult to synthesize. These drugs are obtained by extraction of the poppy plant. Poppies are used to produce morphine. Heroin is semi-synthetic, using morphine and acetic anhyadride.

In addition to Morhpine and Codeine, opium also contains the drug Thebaine, which is used to synthesize other analogs. So bottom line is that these narcotic opiate-based drugs still require actual opium. So where are the pharmaceutical companies acquiring their raw materials from? Likely Afghanistan, whose opium is fueling both an illicit drug trade via heroin, (which the CIA may or may not be trafficking in), and Rx drugs, which Big Pharma, having access to cheaper and more easily obtained raw materials, is able to produce and sell for greater profit.

http://www.drugs-forum.com/opiate-chemistry.html

thanks for the answer

with a little more details into this topic & fact finding, that could be a blockbuster story.

No, it's Tasmania

Tasmania is the world's largest producer of opium alkaloids for the pharmaceutical market

Standards placed on the industry by the Federal, State and US governments are stringent with very high levels of scientific expertise necessary.

The industry is highly efficient. It produces about 50% of the world's concentrated poppy straw (CPS) for morphine and related opiates from merely 10.7% of the production area. (Concentrated Poppy Straw is actually the extracted opiates crystallized out of solution, not the poppy heads and stalks in the photo.)

Other major players are Turkey with 23% of morphine CPS, France with 21% morphine CPS and Spain with 4%. India, by contrast, produces traditional opium from which the US extracts opium alkaloids. India's morphine production is similar to Tasmania. Tasmania has an alkaloid yield of about 9.3 kg/ha compared with France at 7.0 kg/ha, Spain 4.9 kg/ha and Turkey at 1.1 kg/ha.

Edit:
By the way, I would wrather not say this, but ok: a friend of mine is privy to inside knowledge about drug dealing by Hamid Karzai's government. Not only is Karzai an oil man, Karzai and his brother are drug dealers. Most of the Afghan poppy crops are converted into heroin and methamphetamine, and if you try to stop that trade, the Afghan government will threaten you or kill you. They are simply doing again what the CIA once trained them to do.

Edit 2:
A good additional source for this is the work of Michael Ruppert. (E.g. Crossing the Rubicon, or see: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/sept1801.html)

Black Market Opium

Right, SnowCrash, the Afghan crops appear to be sold strictly into the black market. So the clip is misleading when it implies that Afghan poppies are being converted into prescription drugs. Afghanistan is source to 92% of the global heroin trade by some accounts, up from 79% in 1999. (Black Market). Who benefits from this enormous black market? Karzai, CIA? I don't have any evidence that Big Pharma is tapping this source. I just suspected they might.

There is a move to get Afghanistan to go the way of Turkey and start selling 'legitimate' opium alkaloids to the pharmaceutical market. But then that would create a glut and undercut the black market that "someone" has a vested stake in. During the occupation the production has boomed. This place is about oil and drugs.

http://www.thestar.com/article/185452

Ambiguity towards poppy crops

Absolutely, some of the poppy crops may well end up in cheap pharmaceuticals, but it's helpful to know about Tasmania on the one hand, and the enormous drug profits laundered in Western markets on the other. Lots of it goes to and through Russia and Iran. Iran has a big problem with heroin addicts, btw. There is a lot of motive for and a lot of money to be made in the drug trade.

I know of a story where a regional leader intercepted a drug shipment. He was subsequently threatened by Karzai's brother: return the merchandise, or die.

About that move, yeah, I also know that Dutch investors try to get Afghan poppy farmers to cultivate saffron instead of poppy crops, and this effort is then symbolically supported by the Dutch parliament. We have troops in Uruzgan, an acquaintance of mine is currently doing his second tour of duty as a medic. (He's been busy the last few months.)

But..you know, these efforts indeed seem symbolic and Helmand is still harvesting poppy like mad. The general cover story seems to be: if you mess with the poppy crops, you mess with the livelihood of people you want on your side. This was also explicitly said by German military. They just don't seem to want to even involve themselves with poppy harvesting. All these NATO troops have a "hands off" policy.

Drugs may well be one of the motives for invading Afghanistan. The CIA sometimes funds black op projects with narcotics, a lot of drug related money laundering goes on at Wall Street. The main motive for invading Afghanistan is grabbing access to natural resources from the Russians and the Chinese, but, as always, geopolitical intervention is a multi-pronged strategy. I always think of geopolitical intervention as a result of a supercomputer calculating the most beneficial strategic action, yielding the biggest number of positive results in different areas (Israel, China, Russia, oil, drugs, regime change) given multiple parameters and interests. I really think the Pentagon uses complex decision making systems for this end.

Quotes such as (from the interesting link you gave):

Today, it's Afghanistan. Ongoing attempts by the United States to obliterate the poppy fields of that embattled land have been a fiasco. Afghan fields now supply the opium for 92 per cent of the global heroin trade.

(...)

Chief among them is the Senlis Council, an international policy think-tank with offices in London, Paris, Kabul and, as of this month, Ottawa.

It says that legitimizing the poppy crop is the only feasible solution to Afghanistan's drug crisis. Licensing not only would cut out the drug-lord insurgents, but also correct the shortfall in painkilling medicines available to the developing world.

Faced last month with an opiates shortage in the United Kingdom, the British Medical Association surprised many by calling for an investigation into the idea: "We should be looking at this and saying how can we convert it (opium) from being an illicit crop to a legal crop that is medicinally useful?"

Even Liberal deputy leader Michael Ignatieff got in on the act. Last week, he told a military audience in Ottawa that he had "stress-tested" the Senlis proposal and thinks Canada should spearhead an international effort to license Afghan poppy fields.

Washington, however, remains implacably opposed, saying complete eradication, no matter how long it takes, is the only acceptable outcome.

...really reveal the ambiguity. Washington claims to desire complete eradication, but is doing little to back up their hollow rhetoric with action. Really Obama-esque, I would say, so I expect this practice to continue...I mean..how can you have "ongoing efforts to obliterate" and at the same time exploding opium production? The White House seems to be spinning the facts.

The war for drugs

I love the punchline:
If the United States, under the influence of corporate interests, was willing to invade Iraq to dominate its oil economy, we would be imprudent not to assume, or at least question, whether the same is occurring in Afghanistan over its opiate economy.

Consider these three things:
1. The Taliban ban on opium
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/taliban-s-ban-on-poppy-a-success...

2. Turkey's dependense on the drug trade and the The Susurluk Legacy
http://mondediplo.com/1998/07/05turkey
http://adriangatton.com/archive/1990_01_01_archive.html

3. Sibel Edmonds case
http://cryptome.org/turkey-tale.htm