Extreme Measures: Arming the Zealotocracy, Serving the Elite

Extreme Measures: Arming the Zealotocracy, Serving the Elite

Anglo-American Political Philosophy 101: The Poor Must Die

Anglo-American Political Philosophy 101: The Poor Must Die

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

Filosofía: Justicia y reconocimiento

Drugs for Europe: Afghanistan Heroin Transits Through Kosovo

Drugs for Europe: Afghanistan Heroin Transits Through Kosovo

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

narco, violencia en Mexico y la CIA...entre otros...

Resulta casi incomprensible lo que sucede, para quien se acerca al tema de la violencia en México y el enfrentamiento entre las narco mafias y el Estado en el presente, sobre toido si se atiene uno a la información de los mass media, pero cuando toma uno la información de medios alternativos como el caso de globalresearch.com se encuentran interesantes planteamientos, que merece la pena analizar detalladamente
Es el caso de este artículo donde se ven las verdaderas razones de todos estos fenómenos de violencia que siempre se mencionan como aislados de las raíces políticas tanto de México como de los Estados Unidos, y con ello , de las hondas raíces económicas de un estado imperial frente a su vecino del Sur,México.

Is the CIA behind Mexico's Bloody Drug War?


By Mike Whitney

Global Research, April 26, 2010


On April 23, two patrol cars were ambushed by armed gunman in downtown Ciudad Juarez. In the ensuing firefight, seven policemen were killed as well as a 17-year old boy who was caught in the crossfire. All of the assailants escaped uninjured fleeing the crime-scene in three SUVs. The bold attack was executed in broad daylight in one of the busiest areas of the city. According to the Associated Press:

"Hours after the attack, a painted message directed to top federal police commanders and claiming responsibility for the attack appeared on a wall in downtown Ciudad Juarez. It was apparently signed by La Linea gang, the enforcement arm of the Juarez drug cartel. The Juarez cartel has been locked in a bloody turf battle with the Sinaloa cartel, led by Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman.

"This will happen to you ... for being with El Chapo Guzman and to all the dirtbags who support him. Sincerely, La Linea," the message read." ("7 Mexican police officers killed in Ciudad Juarez", Olivia Torres, AP)

The massacre in downtown Juarez is just the latest incident in Mexico's bloody drug war. Between 5 to 6 more people will be killed on Saturday, and on every day thereafter with no end in sight. It's a war that cannot be won, but that hasn't stopped the Mexican government from sticking to its basic game-plan.

The experts and politicians disagree about the origins of the violence in Juarez, but no one disputes that 23,000 people have been killed since 2006 in a largely futile military operation initiated by Mexican president Felipe Calderon. Whether the killing is the result of the ongoing turf-war between the rival drug cartels or not, is irrelevant. The present policy is failing and needs to be changed. The militarization of the war on drugs has been a colossal disaster which has accelerated the pace of social disintegration. Mexico is quickly becoming a failed state, and Washington's deeply-flawed Merida Initiative, which provides $1.4 billion in aid to the Calderon administration to intensify military operations, is largely to blame.

The surge in narcotics trafficking and drug addiction go hand-in-hand with destructive free trade policies which have fueled their growth. NAFTA, in particular, has triggered a massive migration of people who have been pushed off the land because they couldn't compete with heavily-subsidized agricultural products from the US. Many of these people drifted north to towns like Juarez which became a manufacturing hub in the 1990s. But Juarez's fortunes took a turn for the worse a few years later when competition from the Far East grew fiercer. Now most of the plants and factories have been boarded up and the work has been outsourced to China where subsistence wages are the norm. Naturally, young men have turned to the cartels as the only visible means of employment and upward mobility. That means that free trade has not only had a ruinous effect on the economy, but has also created an inexhaustible pool of recruits for the drug trade.

Washington's Merida Initiative--which provides $1.4 billion in aid to the Calderon administration to intensify military operations--has only made matters worse. The public's demand for jobs, security and social programs, has been answered with check-points, crackdowns and state repression. The response from Washington hasn't been much better. Obama hasn't veered from the policies of the prior administration. He is as committed to a military solution as his predecessor, George W. Bush.

But the need for change is urgent. Mexico is unraveling and, as the oil wells run dry, the prospect of a failed state run by drug kingpins and paramilitaries on US's southern border becomes more and more probable. The drug war is merely a symptom of deeper social problems; widespread political corruption, grinding poverty, soaring unemployment, and the erosion of confidence in public institutions. But these issues are brushed aside, so the government can pursue its one-size-fits-all military strategy without second-guessing or remorse. Meanwhile, the country continues to fall apart.



THE CLASHING CARTELS

The big cartels are engaged in a ferocious battle for the drug corridors around Juarez. The Sinaloa, Gulf and La Familia cartels have formed an alliance against the upstart Los Zetas gang. Critics allege that the Calderon administration has close ties with the Sinaloa cartel and refuses to arrest its members. Here's an excerpt from an Al Jazeera video which points to collusion between Sinaloa and the government.

"The US Treasury identifies at least 20 front companies that are laundering drug money for the Sinaloa cartel...There are allegations that the Mexican government is "favoring" the cartel. According to Diego Enrique Osorno, investigative journalist and author of the "The Sinaloa Cartel":

"There are no important detentions of Sinaloa cartel members. But the government is hunting down adversary groups, new players in the world of drug trafficking."

International Security Expert, Edgardo Buscaglia, says that "of over 50,000 drug related arrests, only a very small percentage have been Sinaloa cartel members, and no cartel leaders. Dating back to 2003, law enforcement data shows objectively that the government has been hitting the weakest organized crime groups in Mexico, but they have not been hitting the main crime group, the Sinaloa Federation, that's responsible for 45% of the drug trade in this country." (Al Jazeera)

There's no way to verify whether the Calderon administration is in bed with the Sinaloa cartel, but Al Jazeera's report is pretty damning. A similar report appeared in the Los Angeles Times which revealed that the government had diverted funds that were earmarked for struggling farmers (who'd been hurt by NAFTA) "to the families of notorious drug traffickers and several senior government officials, including the agriculture minister." Here's an excerpt from the Los Angeles Times:

"According to several academic studies, as much as 80% of the money went to just 20% of the registered farmers...Among the most eyebrow-raising recipients were three siblings of billionaire drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, head of the powerful Sinaloa cartel, and the brother of Guzman's onetime partner, Arturo Beltran Leyva". ("Mexico farm subsidies are going astray", Tracy Wilkinson, Los Angeles Times)

There's no doubt that if the LA Times knows about the circular flow of state money to drug traffickers, than the Obama administration knows too. So why does the administration persist with the same policy and continue to support the people they pretend to be fighting?

In forty years, US drug policy has never changed. The same "hunt them down, bust them, and lock them up" philosophy continues to this day. That's why many critics believe that the drug war is really about control, not eradication. It's a matter of who's in line to rake in the profits; small-time pushers who run their own operations or politically-connected kingfish who have agents in the banks, the intelligence agencies, the military and the government. Currently, in Juarez, the small fries' are getting wiped out while the big-players are getting stronger. In a year or so, the Sinaloa cartel will control the streets, the drug corridors, and the border. The violence will die down and the government will proclaim "victory", but the flow of drugs into the US will increase while the situation for ordinary Mexicans will continue to deteriorate.

Here's a clip from an article in the Independent by veteran journalist Hugh O'Shaughnessy:

"The outlawing and criminalizing of drugs and consequent surge in prices has produced a bonanza for producers everywhere, from Kabul to Bogota, but, at the Mexican border, where an estimated $39,000m in narcotics enter the rich US market every year, a veritable tsunami of cash has been created. The narcotraficantes, or drug dealers, can buy the murder of many, and the loyalty of nearly everyone. They can acquire whatever weapons they need from the free market in firearms north of the border and bring them into Mexico with appropriate payment to any official who holds his hand out." ("The US-Mexico border: where the drugs war has soaked the ground blood red", Hugh O'Shaughnessy The Independent)

It's no coincidence that Kabul and Bogota are the the de facto capitals of the drug universe. US political support is strong in both places, as is the involvement of US intelligence agencies. But does that suggest that the CIA is at work in Mexico, too? Or, to put it differently: Why is the US supporting a client that appears to be allied to the most powerful drug cartel in Mexico? That's the question.

THE CHECKERED HISTORY OF THE CIA

In August 1996, investigative journalist Gary Webb released the first installment of Dark Alliance in the San Jose Mercury exposing the CIA's involvement in the drug trade. The article blew the lid off the murky dealings of the agency's covert operations. Webb's words are as riveting today as they were when they first appeared 14 years ago:

"For the better part of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a Mercury News investigation has found.

This drug network opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles, a city now known as the "crack'' capital of the world. The cocaine that flooded in helped spark a crack explosion in urban America

and provided the cash and connections needed for L.A.'s gangs to buy automatic weapons.

It is one of the most bizarre alliances in modern history: the union of a U.S.-backed army attempting to overthrow a revolutionary socialist government and the Uzi-toting "gangstas'' of Compton and South-Central Los Angeles." ("America's 'crack' plague has roots in Nicaragua war", Gary Webb, San Jose Mercury News)

Counterpunch editor Alexander Cockburn has also done extensive research on the CIA/drug connection. Here's an excerpt from an article titled "The Government's Dirty Little Secrets", which ran in the Los Angeles Times.

"CIA Inspector General Frederick Hitz finally conceded to a U.S. congressional committee that the agency had worked with drug traffickers and had obtained a waiver from the Justice Department in 1982 (the beginning of the Contra funding crisis) allowing it not to report drug trafficking by agency contractors. Was the lethal arsenal deployed at Roodeplaat assembled with the advice from the CIA and other U.S. agencies? There were certainly close contacts over the years. It was a CIA tip that led the South African secret police to arrest Nelson Mandela." (The Government's Dirty Little Secrets, Los Angeles Times, commentary, 1998)

And then there's this from independent journalist Zafar Bangash:

"The CIA, as Cockburn and (Jeffrey) St Clair reveal, had been in this business right from the beginning. In fact, even before it came into existence, its predecessors, the OSS and the Office of Naval Intelligence, were involved with criminals. One such criminal was Lucky Luciano, the most notorious gangster and drug trafficker in America in the forties."

The CIA's involvement in drug trafficking closely dovetails America's adventures overseas - from Indo-China in the sixties to Afghanistan in the eighties....As Alfred McCoy states in his book: Politics of Heroin: CIA complicity in the Global Drug Trade, beginning with CIA raids from Burma into China in the early fifties, the agency found that 'ruthless drug lords made effective anti-communists." ("CIA peddles drugs while US Media act as cheerleaders", Zafar Bangash, Muslimedia, January 16-31, 1999)

And, this from author William Blum:

"ClA-supported Mujahedeen rebels ... engaged heavily in drug trafficking while fighting against the Soviet-supported government," writes historian William Blum. "The Agency's principal client was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, one of the leading druglords and a leading heroin refiner. CIA-supplied trucks and mules, which had carried arms into Afghanistan, were used to transport opium to laboratories along the Afghan/Pakistan border. The output provided up to one half of the heroin used annually in the United States and three-quarters of that used in Western Europe...."

And, this from Portland Independent Media:

"Before 1980, Afghanistan produced 0% of the world's opium. But then the CIA moved in, and by 1986 they were producing 40% of the world's heroin supply. By 1999, they were churning out 3,200 TONS of heroin a year--nearly 80% of the total market supply. But then something unexpected happened. The Taliban rose to power, and by 2000 they had destroyed nearly all of the opium fields. Production dropped from 3,000+ tons to only 185 tons, a 94% reduction! This drop in revenue hurt not only the CIA's Black Budget projects, but also the free-flow of laundered money in and out of the Controller's banks." (Portland Independent Media)
The evidence of CIA involvement in the drug trade is vast, documented and compelling. Still, does that mean that there is some nefarious 3-way connection between the Sinaloa Cartel, the Calderon administration and the CIA? Isn't it more likely that US policymakers are simply stuck in an ideological rut and are unable to break free from the culture of militarism that has swallowed Washington whole? Author John Ross answers these questions and more in a speech he delivered at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington D.C. in April 2009. Here's an excerpt:

"What does Washington want from Mexico? On the security side, the U.S. seeks total control of Mexico's security apparatus. With the creation of NORTHCOM (Northern Command) designed to protect the U.S. landmass from terrorist attack, Mexico is designated North America's southern security perimeter and U.S. military aircraft now has carte blanche to penetrate Mexican airspace. Moreover, the North American Security and Prosperity Agreement (ASPAN in its Mexican initials) seeks to integrate the security apparatuses of the three NAFTA nations under Washington's command. Now the Merida Initiative signed by Bush II and Calderon in early 2007 allows for the emplacement of armed U.S. security agents - the FBI, the DEA, the CIA, and ICE - on Mexican soil and contractors like the former Blackwater cannot be far behind. Wars are fought for juicy government contracts and $1.3 billion in Merida moneys are going directly to U.S. defense contractors - forget about the Mexican middleman.

On the energy side, the designated target is, of course, the privatization of PEMEX, Mexico's nationalized oil industry, with a particular eye out for risk contracts on deep sea drilling in the Gulf of Mexico utilizing technology only the EXXONs of this world possess." (John Ross, "The Big Scam : How and Why Washington Hooked Mexico on the Drug War)

The drug war is the mask behind which the real policy is concealed. The United States is using all the implements in its national security toolbox to integrate Mexico into a North America Uberstate, a hemispheric free trade zone that removes sovereign obstacles to corporate looting and guarantees rich rewards for defense contractors. As Ross notes, all of the usual suspects are involved, including the FBI and CIA. That means the killing in Juarez will continue until Washington's objectives are achieved.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

© Copyright Mike Whitney, Global Research, 2010

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=18877

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007





CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMO LA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

La cara oculta de Facebook

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

PELICULA COLOMBIANA - LA VIRGEN DE LOS SICARIOS

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

¿posmodernismo o el gran engaño?iconos y materialismo crítico en el presente, de la hermenéutica posmoderna al materialismo filosófico

El texto( con cortes por el modelo google) que presentamos a continuación es un libro del filósofo mexicano Mauricio Beuchot titulado Las caras del símbolo: el ícono y el ídolo
Se trata de un libro de interés, desde la filosofía crítica que defiende el sistema del Materialismo Filosófico. El autor mexicano menciona la Teoría del Cierre Categorial de Gustavo Bueno, clave de las propuestas sistemáticas del Materialismo Filosófico.
Sin embargo, el defensor de la llamada hermenéutica analógica, M Beuchot, cae en un vicio muy común,a saber: citar textos o conceptos de un sistema qu se opne asus propias tesis, pero sin mencionar o dejar bien claras alguns cuestiones clave como son, las definiciones de conceptos. El ejemplo más evident de esto es el siguiente: cuando Beuchot se refiere a Gustavo Bueno y su concepto de categorías, y el de cierre categorial, abre una vía falsa para sostener su propia tesis sobre la necesidad insuperable de una hermenéutica fundamentada en la idea filosófica de analogía;esto es así, según Beunchot, si se quiere evitar el excesivo escepticismo a que nos llevaría el posmodernismo, por ejemplo, de Vattimo,entre otros.
El concepto tanto de icono como de ídolo, entnto rebasarían ambos los cierres categoriales de ls ciencias positivas, es la tesis qu oide el principio, porque no hay una demostración de lo que se da por base epistemológica de lo ontológico que se manifiesta en los fenómenos de la iconicidad y la idolatría.
La diferencia que podemos agregar a la manera de exponer sus tesis respecto de Gustavo Bueno y el Materialismo Filosófico está , en uno de los puntos cruciales, en la distinción entre Ideas y Conceptos. Pretende Buechot hacernos ver en lo que son ideas, conceptos categoriales de una ciencia, lo cual es imposible no por cuestiones de ideología o de metafísica, sino por la propia materia de dichos términos del campo...los iconos con en parte materiales de tipo M1, pero en gran parte su componente psicológico-social, en términos del Materialismo Filosófico, materiales M2, han de ser relacionados con la materialidad terciogenéricaes decir, el modelo de relaciones que se estabelecen entre lo representado por el icono o el ídolo , con los cuerpos , ontológicamente nucleados de las religiones, es decir, el material que corresponde a M3...No es posible una ciencia cerrada de los iconos ni de los ídolos, por su componente beta operatorio, ya que los sujetos operatorios no uden ser segregados de las operaciones en dichos campos, de ahí la recurrencia de Mauricio Beuchot a plateamientos vinculados con la hermenéutica teológica, aun cuando su intento de utilización de la analogía aristotélica sea loable, no logra salir de ese círculo que lo encierra desde la menciinada anteriormente en este breve texto: la peticion de principio


CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

TEXTAREA_ID

arsfilosofo en facebook

ARSFILOSOFO o del arte del filósofo materialista

Promocionar tu página también
CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

JUsticia injusta y Edad Media de nuevo cuño. La banca lava dinero y los trabajadores sufren embargos "legales" de sus salarios

drug money laundering o de cómo la gran banca lava mejor…el dinero negro de la droga
El sistema bancario internacional es un perfecto modelo de lo que es el funcionamiento de una de las ramas del poder más fuertes dentro de las democracias homologadas del presente tiempo de globalización y posmodernismo orwelliano
El banco norteamericano Wachovia, que fue adquirido en la turbulencia de la crisis de 2008 por Wells Fargo, es uno de los que se sabe y se ha probado como uno de los lavadores de dinero de los cárteles de la droga. Se sabe de 380 mil millones de dóalres lavados y de una multa de 160 millones
Bueno, no está mal el negocio…para este banco.Y los demás que han ido a esta fuente de cash o sea, de efectivo , para sobrevivir en tiempos difíciles.
La cuestión es que si un ciudadano en España , pongamos por caso,solicita un préstamo de 300 euros y luego lo va aumentando a raíz de la generosa oferta de tomar más, por parte de una de las varias compañías tapadera de los grandes bancos, como es Cofidis, que presta dinero a por ejemplo, asalariados cuya única garantía o “aval” es su nómina , el susodicho banco , el Santander, o sea, Cofidis, va a llegar hasta seis mil euros de préstamo a la módica tasa de casi un 25 % de interés. En caso de no pagar puntualmente el recibo mensual a este banco , se le cobrará un recargo mensual de casi un , créalo usted, 50 % extra.
Bien. El citado ciudadano , en caso de no poder hacer frente a su compromiso de pagar lo prestado por Cofidis o sea Banco de Santander, se verá frente a un JUZGADO en el cual , si no tiene dinero para pagarse un abogado, solicitar uno de oficio al Estado es su “derecho”. Ahora bien: ese derecho implica unas condiciones, tal como ser incapaz de pagar un abogado privado, es decir, tener un umbral de salario mensaul que no supere un mínimo bastante bajo.
Sigue el procedimiento de la JUSTICIA ( créase oo no , ese es su nombre real): el juicio contra el no pagador se saca adelante de este modo en España: no presenta abogado, por no poderlo pagar ni tener uno de oficio, ya que su salario supera el umbral establecido por las leyes vía “Colegio de abogados”( es decir, la cofradía de corte MEDIEVAL). El caso es que ese asalariado que se atrevió a no pagarle a un gran banco , sea el Santander,Wachovia,BBVA,Citigroup,etc etc, se verá con su nómina CONFISCADA, es decir, se embaragrá su salario para que el tal banco pueda cbrar su préstamo impagado. Esto sin que el juez haya escuchado las razones del acusado, porque no puede éste acudir en su defensa si no va con abogado y procurador , las dos , eh.Bien. El siguiente paso es que cuando cobre lo que el juzgado decida, se verá al borde de la miseria, tanto el acusado como su familia.Esto es lo que se conoce como procedimiento judicial…y no va ala cárcel porque de ir, el banco no podría cobrarse a lo mafioso su préstamo del cual ya ha cobrado en la inmensa mayoría de los casos , mucho más de lo que prestó por la sencilla razón de los intereses tan sublimemente excesivos…
La cuestión esencial es , por lo tanto la siguiente:
Se puede y debe dejar a la banca tomar y enriquecerse con el dinero de las mafias de la droga , pero a los que piden un préstamo , por ejemplo, para pagar los estudios de sus hijos que tampoco han logrado becas o ayudas de un Estado pseudodemorcrático y pseudo socialista y obrero , en el caso del PSOE español pongamos por caso….éstos cidadanos carne de cañón de la Big Bussiness banca y el sistema judicial INJUSTO Y MEDIEVAL…no tiene más que someterse a este modelo medieval de siervos de la gleba al servicio de los amos y sus capataces políitico jurídicos…todo ello aderezado de mucho circo televisivo y mucho pan para un pueblo cada día más atemorizado ante la perspectiva de no tener ni qiquera un salario que exponer a la banca voraz que acabe fagocitándoselo vía JUSTICIA en esos tremendos fantasmas de la Idea de Justicia que son los procesos de embargo de nóminas….
Aquí pongo el artículo publicado por la revista norteamericana NACLA ( está en inglés, discúlpenme)
lterNet / By Zach Carter 52 COMMENTS
Wall Street Is Laundering Drug Money and Getting Away with It
Wall Street has been caught laundering massive amounts of drug money. So why isn’t anybody being punished?
July 16, 2010 |
This piece originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future. It has been expanded for this publication.

Too-big-to-fail is a much bigger problem than you thought. We’ve all read damning accounts of the government saving banks from their risky subprime bets, but it turns out that the Wall Street privilege problem is far more deeply ingrained in the U.S. legal system than the simple bailouts witnessed in 2008. America’s largest banks can engage in flagrantly criminal activity on a massive scale and emerge almost completely unscathed. The latest sickening example comes from Wachovia Bank: Accused of laundering $380 billion in Mexican drug cartel money, the financial behemoth is expected to emerge with nothing more than a slap on the wrist thanks to an official government policy which protects megabanks from criminal charges.

Bloomberg’s Michael Smith has penned a devastating expose detailing Wachovia’s drug-money operations and the government’s twisted response. The bank was moving money behind literally tons of cocaine from violent drug cartels. It wasn’t an accident. Internal whistleblowers at Wachovia warned that the bank was laundering drug money, higher-ups at the bank actively looked the other way in order to score bigger profits, and the U.S. government is about to let everyone involved get off scott free. The bank will not be indicted, because it is official government policy not to prosecute megabanks. From Smith’s story:

No big U.S. bank . . . has ever been indicted for violating the Bank Secrecy Act or any other federal law. Instead, the Justice Department settles criminal charges by using deferred-prosecution agreements, in which a bank pays a fine and promises not to break the law again . . . . Large banks are protected from indictments by a variant of the too-big-to-fail theory. Indicting a big bank could trigger a mad dash by investors to dump shares and cause panic in financial markets.

Wachovia was acquired by Wells Fargo in late 2008. The bank’s penalty for laundering over $380 billion in drug money is going to be a promise not to ever do it again, and a $160 million fine. The fine is so small that Wachovia will almost certainly turn a profit on its drug financing business after legal costs and penalties are taken into account.

International authorities know the banker-drug-dealer connection goes well beyond Wachovia, but governments aren’t doing anything about it. A 2009 report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime found that most rules to prevent drug money laundering through banks are being violated. From the report:

“At a time of major bank failures, money doesn’t smell, bankers seem to believe. Honest citizens, struggling in a time of economic hardship, wonder why the proceeds of crime – turned into ostentatious real estate, cars, boats and planes – are not seized.”

In late 2009, the head of that U.N. office, Antonio Maria Costa, told the press that much interbank lending—short-term loans banks make to each other—was being supported by drug money. As financial markets froze up in 2007 and 2008, banks turned to drug cartels for cash. Without that drug money, many major banks might not have survived.
ECONOMY
AlterNet / By Zach Carter 52 COMMENTS
Wall Street Is Laundering Drug Money and Getting Away with It
Wall Street has been caught laundering massive amounts of drug money. So why isn’t anybody being punished?

This scenario is several steps beyond what most of us think about when we debate too-big-to-fail. The government isn’t shielding Wachovia from losses on risky bets in the capital markets casinos— it’s shielding the bank from the prosecution of outright criminal behavior. The drug money business did not pose risks to the financial system, and Wachovia wasn’t losing money on it. Wachovia is simply being shielded from what ought to be the ordinary functioning of the justice system.

Think about what would happen if you or I were accused of laundering $380 billion in drug money. We could not simply settle the allegations out of court in exchange for an apology and a fine. We’d spend the rest of our lives in jail for financing a ruthless, bloody and illegal business. About 22,000 people have been killed in the Mexican drug trade since 2006, and the drug trade itself can’t happen without extensive money laundering operations. Moving the money is one of the most difficult and critical elements of any criminal enterprise—without ways to convert crooked cash into seemingly innocuous funds, crooks simply can’t operate. Wachovia was doing top-level dirty work for drug dealers.

On the streets of American cities, the mere possession of these drugs can land you with a multi-year prison sentence. But financing multi-billion-dollar drug empires? Don’t do it again, pretty please.

Too-big-to-fail isn’t just a matter of systemic risk and mathematical models gone haywire, It’s about the basic functioning of our democracy. You cannot have a functional democracy in which an entire privileged class of bankers can get away with anything—and if you can get away with laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in drug money, there’s not much you can’t get away with.

Yesterday, Congress passed a decent Wall Street reform bill, but that legislation will not end this criminal imbalance. If the bill will really end too-big-to-fail, the Justice Department could immediately end its special immunity policies for large financial institutions. That isn’t going to happen. The public deserves tougher prosecutors, but we also need further legislation to break up the megabanks so that they can’t use their economic clout to bully everyone in Washington.

Zach Carter is an economics editor at AlterNet. He writes a weekly blog on the economy for the Media Consortium and his work has appeared in the Nation, Mother Jones, the American Prospect and Salon.

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

la Economía criminal y la democracia en México, estudio de caso.Aguayo,Aristegui,Dresser y Meyer

Aguayo,Aristegui,Dresser y Meyer
El sistema finnaciero globalizado en esta fase de crisis económica muestra en México su cara más violenta. Es aquí sobre todo, pero no únicamente, donde la violencia se hace al parecer necesaria para regular el propio sistema capitalista. El negocio de la droga es por hoy uno de los más lucrativos, aunque se tenga que asemejar cada vez más a nuevas formas de violencia .

REOS SALIAN A MATAR POR LA NOCHES EN TORREON Y DURANGO

Aris-cinefile: Cine Colombiano I: La Virgen de los Sicarios

Aris-cinefile: Cine Colombiano I: La Virgen de los Sicarios

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

uno de los momentos clave de los procesos judiciales en las democracias

El sistema neofeudal del capitalismo democrático-fascista, tiene en su núcleo esencial el uso permanente de procesos judiciales para sostener este vil y usurero voraz modo de extorsión mafiosa contra las bases trabajadoras de la sociedad
este video es una muestra de cómo funciona, en el límite, el aparato judicial finnaciero de la democracia, en este caso, el ejemplo está tomado de Estados Uniddos
Hay que aclarar que cada Estado tiene su propio modo de aplicar atributivamente , esto del proceso....
Sin embargo el núcleo es el mismo , considerado estructuralmente ...Violencia bajo diversas maneras pero el fin es mantener las tasas de ganancia al máximo a toda costa, pero eso sí , en nombre de la libertad y la democracia...no Orwell podría haberlo imaginado en este nivel de sofisticación del presente siglo XXI
http://www.backspinmymovie.com/torture.html

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

Presentacion "Colombia Feroz" - octubre 2009

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

Argentina's Economic Collapse - Part 1 of 12

CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA

the sound of silence lyrics ¿ consumidores satisfechos ?

Si se fija uno en la letra, no parece que se hable sino de la sociedad de consumidores satisfechos del presente, aunque utilicen la metáfora , desde luego

interesante lectura crítica de García Márquez

Entre otros muchos temas de interés, la obra de García Márquez puede resultarnos de utilidad en el presente por ejemplo, para un análisis de las causas de la violencia , en particular la de su natal Colombia, y de cierto modo ayudaría a entender un poco más claramente la gran violencia que se está ya dando a niveles equiparables y acaso superiores a los de la Colombia del gran escritor

Otras interesantes cuestiones que se analizan en eltexto que hemos puesto aquí es la relación de García Márquez con el cine


CRITICA FILOSOFICA PARA MANTENER LA VIDA SABER Y PODER PARA MANTENERNOS LIBRES COMOLA CAPACIDAD DE INDEPENDENCIA FUNDAMENTAL PARA LA VIDA