The subject of your libellous comments are irrelevant to the simple point I was making. You simply can't go round throwing stuff like that out there without being prepared to back it up with known fact. I'm not defedning Cameron, I'm objecting to you posting subjective, baseless opinion as 'fact'. You do it all the ****ing time, and it's tiresome in the extreme.
So when you said ALL you didn't mean ALL then? It was casual, I never expected to be cross examined by Cameron's defence team <laugh> When "all" is said casually, it doesn't mean every single one. Oh right it was just a lazy generalisation (which is what I said) Now it wasn't lazy, that is your opinion, which is not fact,
When all is said casually it doesn't mean all? wtf is that supposed to mean? It was a lazy generalisation, that's not opinion, it's fact. It was a stupid statement and typical of the extremes that you try and paint things as.
Woah Tobes you are really off on one today Every time I look there is like 3 notifications, what'swith the manic bashing this morning mate, not had your coffee yet? or too much coffee?
Got to say that no i do not know "that the drugs trade is not run by gangsters" I have always known suspected higher level involvement and the history books point to that but they do not tell us who is running it today, so who is? Who do you think is flogging all of the opium from Afghanistan ffs It's only the world's biggest supplier, and that return to global supplier happened under US occupation [/QUOTE] Some people argue that restoring the opium trade was one of the primary drivers for taking out the taliban and it certainly worked but again who then is running this trade under american rule, Military? CIA? Black ops?
The same people lad, people do not give up a trillion $ trade. As for the CIA it's well established fact that they helped the contras bring smack into the US to sell in order to buy weapons to run amok in Nicaragua. The CIA is civilian run not military run Things are today as they were then.
I think people underestimate just how big the black market in strap on trading is. There are parts of the world where entire villages work for strap on racketeers.
The same people lad, people do not give up a trillion $ trade. As for the CIA it's well established fact that they helped the contras being smack into the US to sell in order to buy weapons to run amok in Nicaragua. The CIA is civilian run not military run [/QUOTE] What same same people? the ones in the history books are long dead so are many of the systems of control and power they had (although new versions in place) Yes the CIA helped the contras, so who is/was sorting the stuff from afghanistan if not gangsters?
"The drugs trade is not run by gangsters" is far too wide a statement. Firstly because anyone seen as selling drugs could be refered to as a ganster even if they aren't your stereotypical gangster. So the CIA or whoever the finger is pointed at, could be referred to as gangsters. Secondly it depends on geography, the type of drug and what level of the industry as to who are the people running things.
What same same people? the ones in the history books are long dead so are many of the systems of control and power they had (although new versions in place) Yes the CIA helped the contras, so who is/was sorting the stuff from afghanistan is not gangsters?[/QUOTE] _____________ Your quotes are a bit messed up ______ incorrect assumption. Families continue business over the generations and always have done. That's not even something I need to provide "proof" for surely. How couldit be gansters. rofl, the Afghan harvests were destroyed by the taliban, all but wiped out. Only after the invasion under NATO occupation, mainly the UK and US, did the poppy harvests get restored and infact increased global supply percentage. So what gangsters were managing to hide whole harvests covering many acreage from an occupying multinational force that had taken over the country? I don't have access to paperwork that proves this or that person is involved but it doesn't require any wild speculation to assume that poppy harvests increasing 100 fold under NATO occupation was not accidental or unknown to NATO ffs.
please log in to view this image No not proof, just amusing please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
I'll give up on the families as you clearly have nought on it. So in afghanistan were NATO running the operation?
You have not once ever backed up anytihng with "proof" I have asked you to and you keep making this stupid comment. Common sense is lost on you, businesses are kept within families over generations, even an idiot knows this and yet... As for your second question, NATO is an international military cooperation, so ask yourself the question and the answer is obvious. No. But they were protecting the harvests. That is not disputed. Logically one may ask, "for whom were they protecting the harvests?" Then we get into opinon because if there was absolute proof, we'd all have heard about it by now
NATO troops nice and freindly with the farmers please log in to view this image UNODC - Record harvests 2013. It took 10 years of NATO occupation to get the harvests back to max production http://article.wn.com/view/2013/11/13/Afghanistan_opium_harvest_at_record_high_UNODC/
What have you asked me to back up apart from calling you a liar months ago and as I said post on that thread. I am not asking for proof of anything here, yes we all know NATO knew about the poppies and some would say protecting them but that is because of the context of the situation. IWhat it doesn't tell us is who is running the trade?
