DEA isn’t welcome here

Bolivia: DEA not welcome back despite normalization of ties with Washington

BOGOTA, Colombia — Bolivian President Evo Morales said Tuesday that U.S. drug agents are not welcome back in his country despite the newly announced normalization of diplomatic relations with Washington.

Morales told reporters during a regional summit in the Colombian capital that it is a question of “dignity and sovereignty.”

This is why I like Morales.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to DEA isn’t welcome here

    • Danas says:

      This petition is quite far fetched… Just like any other petition questioning the all powerful (*cough* unlawful *cough*) US government. If you do manage to get enough signatures, the government will simply dismiss it in the same manner as the legalize cannabis petitions… If you read the the banner above the petition carefully, it says “YOUR voice in OUR government.” I presume OUR in this case stands for the rich and powerful…

      • Wayne Hunter says:

        Agreed! The whole “we the people” idea is a sham anyway. None of these petitions are going to make a damn bit of difference. The government set it up to give the illusion that we the people have a voice. As has been demonstrated already, the government is just going to use the responses to affirm the positions it has already taken.

      • Duncan20903 says:

        Defeatism is not a viable strategy to promote change. If you are so convinced it can’t happen, why do you bother commenting? Are you trying to get people to subscribe to guaranteed defeat? The petition does not require any certainty or even any possibility of success in what is asks to be done to help.

        If you guys think everything is hopeless, why not spend your time doing something pleasant? I’ve heard flying a kite is lots of fun!

        • Danas says:

          Duncan, I’ve never said the change cannot happen. I’m convinced that it will, just not through the petitions directly. Of course, they might play a small role in increasing the public’s anger and disappointment in the current government, which, in my opinion, will inspire more creative and effective ways to combat this nonsense. NORML is already suing the feds… And from what I’ve read, any honest judge would rule in favor.
          So the hopes are high 🙂
          I live in UK, and recently the parliament rolled out the same petition system, but to keep the people in the dark, they didn’t advertise it.

        • darkcycle says:

          Duncan, other than providing an unreliable barometer for the mood of the population, the petition site was and is a sham. You gotta admit, you didn’t actually think a petition to legalize was going to cause the law to change, did you? I signed a bunch of those, but I did it knowing that there wouldn’t be any actual movement on these issues, more to continue the noise we’re making. In the last decade the marijuana issue has gone from background noise to a din that is making it harder for the government to focus. Harder to focus on the the things they would LIKE to be focused on (like stealing everydamnthing that isn’t nailed down for their corporate cronies and finding more oil to start wars over). If we can keep edging the volume higher and higher, it will become impossible for them to do their dirty work and they’ll HAVE to find a way to shut down the music, This Music:

        • Duncan20903 says:

          No DC, but we’ve gotten some pretty significant supporting evidence that the people support change, and its gotten us a lot of press. Is that worthless?

          Do you think that if the petition demanding Mr. Obamas resignation got a truly significant number of signatures that it wouldn’t send him a message or generate at least a little bit of press?

          That’s what I mean when I say that it doesn’t have to go all the way to benefit our cause. This stuff is cumulative DC, every little bit helps. It was just a straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back.

  1. claygooding says:

    Morales for President,,maybe he will kick them out of the US!

  2. kaptinemo says:

    Like I said, most foreign countries (particularly Latin American ones) know what most Americans don’t: DEA is CIA’s ‘ho’, and they don’t want to get any political STD’s like ‘destabilization’ by welcoming them in.

    • darkcycle says:


    • Maria says:

      Eh, I consider the DEA to be the CIA’s shambling, feverish, pox carrier. You might catch destabilization. You might not. But just in case, here have some blankets. It’s chilly out there!

      No matter how you look at it the true believers, the moral crusaders, hold us hostage to the mindset that certain consensual activities need to be kept criminal – trading in substances/consuming substances, trading in actions/consuming actions.

      So I hate to insult sex workers by even glancingly comparing ‘hos’ to the rotten DEA. Even more so in light of their parallel struggles for body ownership and their fight for individual self-determination. Or in light of how cartels get vast amounts of funding taking advantage of the situation. Just like with the war on drugs.

      It’s all such a bloody mess.

      • kaptinemo says:

        After reading that, I must humbly and sincerely apologize (deep bow, Nihon-style) to all sex workers out there who may have read this.

        The ladies in question don’t deserve such an unearned association. Their motives are up front and honest, whereas Uncle Sam’s are anything but.

      • Duncan20903 says:

        Maria, just go with “crack ho” to fix your distate of unintentionally insulting sex workers. A crack ho really does live down to the stereotype. (hey, is the plural of ho hos, hose, or hoes?)
        Say, did everyone know that St. Nickolaus is the patron saint of prostitutes? What kind of message does that send the kiddies, I axe you?? But at least it clears up the confusion and incessant controversy over why he so enjoys saying ho-ho-ho. [drumroll][rimshot]

  3. Baron Rathskellar says:

    How dare those ingrates stand up to the golden indispensable superpower. Can we invade now?

  4. Danas says:

    I have a feeling even more South American countries will do the same in the near future, if they can afford to lose a few billion dollar from temporary embargoes from the US. Like any dictatorship, US is becoming too oppressive, in this case all around the world, and NOBODY likes it. If the US push just a little bit more, it’ll lose a whole lot more than it’ll gain from it…

    DEA could lose quite a bit of power, if not disbanded completely, pretty soon because NORML filed a very comprehensive law suite against the US government for raiding one too many medical marijuana dispensaries.

    • kaptinemo says:

      “I have a feeling even more South American countries will do the same in the near future, if they can afford to lose a few billion dollar from temporary embargoes from the US.”

      And here is where globalism might just play a beneficial role, rather than the usual one of being used to filch the natural resources of Developing Nations. The BRIC countries (Brazil-Russia-India-China) would no doubt be happy to take up the slack with foreign, non-US investments, as they have been doing throughout Latin America.

      Which would embolden other nations around the planet to denounce the UN Single Convention Treaty altogether, thus signaling unwillingness to endure any more forced ‘cooperation’ (free translation: interference in their domestic affairs) with US (snicker) ‘anti-drugs’ operations.

      This is turn would signal the death-knell of US-led (LOL, considering the CIA’s involvement in the trade) ‘anti-drugs’ activities.

      The US’s own fiscal house of cards is shaking violently. It cannot afford to spend what amounts to borrowed money to engage in this idiocy anymore, but the pols still don’t believe it, so we’ll be funding further insanity until a final, total collapse…or a revolution. Or both. Either way, international drug prohibition efforts are doomed to either a slow death or a fast one, depending upon what happens in Latin America and here.

  5. Gart says:

    Back in June Mexican President Calderón called for the need to discuss market alternatives to reduce Mexico’s violence. A couple of days ago, (see link to video below) he was even more candid: the onus is on the US!

  6. Rick Steeb says:

    California’s leaders should do the same. Hey, Moonbeam!

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Don’t you think the recent speech from Mr. Newsome might be Jerry sending up a trial balloon? I find it hard to believe that the Lt. Governor would make such a speech without Mr. Brown approval or in that unlikely event, not without starting a shit storm from the powers that be.

  7. Gart says:

    Even though Colombia, and more recently Mexico and several Central American countries, have borne the worst of the worst of the policies Prohibitionists have concocted in their attempt to control the supply of drugs, these countries have little chance of putting an end to this irrational, barbaric and inhumane “war” on their own. That doesn’t mean Colombia, Mexico and drug producing countries in general cannot become, as they say in Spanish, “una piedra en el zapato” (a thorn in the side) and do whatever is necessary to put pressure on those that hold the real power to end it: the major drug consuming countries, in particular the US.

    That is why recent stances taken by current presidents, Morales of Bolivia and Calderón of Mexico; those expressed by former presidents in their own capacity, like Vicente Fox, or jointly via organisations such as the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy and the Global Commission on Drugs Policy are of paramount importance. They represent a first step in the right direction: to build a common, solid and focused front demanding the end to Prohibition and the War on Drugs.

    I have written at large about this issue on my blog. Below is what I say about it in my latest post. I would add that where its says the UK, as far as the supply of drugs is concerned, one should also add to the list those countries that have “legalised”, de jure or de facto, the demand for drugs, either by adopting harm reduction policies or by depenalising or decriminalising the consumption of drugs, i.e. countries such as Holland, Portugal, Spain, etc.

    This is what I say in my post Wilful Blindnes: The New Reality?

    «I have said it before and I say it again: there is very little drug producing countries, such as Mexico, Colombia and the like, can do to alter the dastardly realities imposed on them by Prohibition and the so-called War on Drugs policies. In fact, I find it rather naive to expect that producers could dent in any meaningful way Prohibition and War on Drugs policies when the US, the juggernaut pushing for its implementation and enforcement all over the world, is reluctant to do anything about it.

    Let’s take the case of Mexico. No matter how many times its citizens take to the streets to protest demanding an end to the War on Drugs — as the experience of Colombia during the high of the fight against the drug cartels in the 80′s and 90′s so clearly exposed it — the stubborn fact is that nothing will happen until the real power behind the war on drugs decides otherwise. And the real power, literally and metaphorically, is in the hands of drug consuming countries, most conspicuously the US.

    But make no mistake, it is not just the US that is at fault here, for we, the UK, have played a major role in the current situation, given that we are one of the major consumers in the world too and have done nothing to put an end to this criminal, obscene war. We have to ask ourselves: are we doing anything to put an end to this insane war? Not at all. Are we challenging US drug policies? Not in the slightest. Are we eroding the case for the war on drugs by pursuing a more rational drug policy? Absolutely not. Is the government even considering evaluating its current drug policy? Not a chance. So, we better get down off our high horses because we are all accomplices in this barbaric, inhumane war.»

  8. Curmudgeon says:

    What do you mean in Columbia? IMHO, the Demonic Egotistic Assholes aren’t welcome in the U.S.A.

  9. I wish the Feds followed the Constitution. My 10 ammendment rights are being violated with a U.S court order to take away my medical marijuana. I have been in agony since my release date and losing weight fast. I found myself thinking the other day that my stepdad was right when he said he wished my cancer had killed me. How long must people be tortured when it is “innocent until proven guilty” LMAO at that one

  10. Danas says:

    Anyone interested in this job in the executive office of the President? Anti prohibition warriors should infiltrate the enemy LOL

    • darkcycle says:

      Oooooh noooooooo. No thank you, nope, uh-uh, not me, they don’t WANT me. No sir….
      They want a good little proto-facist.

  11. darkcycle says:

    Off to get coffee. An approved stimulant.

    • PleaseBeCareful says:

      Broderick, P. & Benjamin, A.B. (2004). Caffeine and psychiatric symptoms: a review. Journal of the Oklahoma State Medical Association, 97(12), 538-542.

      Hedges, D.W., Woon, F.L. & Hoopes S.P. (2009). Caffeine-induced psychosis. CNS Spectrums, 14(3),127-129.

      • darkcycle says:

        Bats! How come I’m suddenly surrounded by bats? Malcolm, you’re a bat, Duncan’s a bat, all of you- you’re BATS!. Where did I put that blender!
        Or something to that effect, I think (gratefully acknowledging Hunter S. Thompson, from whom I shamelessly stole for this post).

        • You'veBeenWarned says:

          “HST poisoning (also known as hunterrargargia or thomrocurialism) is a disease caused by exposure to anything connected to Hunter S. Thompson. It can occur in several forms, all of which producing involuntary Gonzoesque action to such a degree that the sufferer may find themselves becoming central figures in their own stories.”

      • Duncan20903 says:

        Yeah, I had that happen once. But that was before I started drinking coffee and only used the super potent caffeine concentrates. Revive with Vivarin no doubt.

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Don’t drink and drive! Stick with Putt Putt.

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Do you know why people say “crazy as bat shit?” It’s because bats only defecate when they’re in bed for the night. Think about it.

  12. Tony Aroma says:

    US DEA agents once beat Morales unconscious!?!?!? No wonder he doesn’t like the US or the DEA!

  13. warren says:

    Go President Morales. You should have thrown the pack of corrupt bastards in jail for a few years.

  14. Damn shame that the DPA again dropped the ball by essentially ignoring the Coca issue, last holding a Coca panel (as the DPF) in 1995:

    Predictably, Ira Glasser spoke at last week’s con as it being a 300 year fight… the way he ‘s running it, I can believe that!

  15. Carol says:

    Wish we had leaders of that degree of class and integrity in the USA.

  16. Scott says:

    Sorry for going a bit off-topic, but I want to share my comment in the WSJ today (article “Report Blames Mexican Security Forces For Abuse”) fwiw:

    Who is mainly to blame for this widespread tragedy? The mainstream media, whom continues to unethically favor prohibition in an exercise of nearly extreme media bias regarding this issue.

    Considering the Commerce Clause (“To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”), according to our Supreme Court, is the sole constitutional basis for the “war on drugs”, and that such a clause has been irrationally applied to authorize Congress to ban the mere possession of certain things (to abandon rationality is to abandon law), there is no real constitutional basis for such a war (i.e. Controlled Substances Act).

    The clear fact is cannabis (nor any other substance) cannot possibly be illegal in the United States.

    Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas basically agrees:

    “Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.”

    Another clear fact is mainstream America still has not been properly informed about the legal hack applied by our Supreme Court, because the mainstream media fails to do their job in this case.

    Prohibitionists annually proclaim (and have for years) in the U.S. National Drug Use & Health Survey that only about 8% of Americans use illicit drugs, and among that overwhelming minority, about 73% use cannabis.

    Despite the reefer madness tactics applied by people with a serious financial interest in maintaining prohibition at any cost, the fact is there is no conclusive science proving any harm in moderate cannabis use. Cannabis can be conveniently vaporized to eliminate the harms of smoking, has a 9% dependency rate (and such dependency is “generally mild”, according to the Institute of Medicine in a report commissioned by the prohibitionists), and cannot be overdosed.

    People should exercise serious care when using the word impairment, because that word can be wielded to easily trample on your liberty. For example, are you impaired when you are at the movie theater with your cell phone turned off? Yes. In fact, you are impaired in some way no matter what you do. An extreme example for clarity is Einstein would have likely failed an IQ test, if he had to take it while riding a roller coaster (he would be so impaired, common sense concludes he would not even be able to finish it). The fact is cannabis “impairment” is temporary and generally mild when used properly, and I exercise my fifth amendment right when it comes to my expertise on the subject.

    Americans have been scammed for decades, now spending anywhere from 12 billion dollars annually (the most conservative amount) to an estimated 150+ billion per year. Any proposal to end the expensive “war on drugs” that formal presidential candidate Obama called an “utter failure”? No.

    Prohibitionists need their prohibition fix, and “We the people” keep enabling their addiction, with disastrous consequences in the areas of law and life.

    Yes, drugs (like anything else) can be and are abused at times (even to truly horrific degrees), but the damage caused by prohibition (including its inability to stop such abuse), as this article in relatively small part proves, is far more disastrous against society.

    The mainstream media better start reporting the above facts, if it cares about its already severely damaged credibility, because the informational back channel online (including this comment) is reporting such, and more Americans are understanding that the prohibitionists are the real “bad guys”, whom literally cannot sustain a single point in their favor.

    • darkcycle says:

      Bully! A hearty “Huzzah!” for you sir. The Wall Street Urinal doesn’t deserve as much, but well done.

  17. Servetus says:

    A new book is out from Christopher Glenn Fichtner, titled Cannabanomics: The Marijuana Policy Tipping Point.

    Review here:

    Fichtner, a psychiatrist — he served as Illinois Director of Mental Health for several years — takes a long, hard look at the politics of irrationality and lays out a compelling diagnosis: ‘essentially, social or mass psychosis.’ You can also throw in racism. The war on drugs is simply a race war by another name, fueled by fear of Mexican and African American culture, with the weight of law brought down on African Americans with wildly disproportionate severity….”

    • Duncan20903 says:

      I must say I’m not so sure that there is racism in people’s hearts, or even in the NYC police when they scam people of color into upgrading from a civil violation to a misdemeanor. One of my dearest friends is a black fellow from West Balmar (The Wire was all but a documentary). I’ve been having a devil of a time convincing him that the best policy when it comes to request permission to search is to politely “just say no.” Rolling over for the cops seems to be part of the inner city culture, and deeply ingrained. The po-po don’t pick on them because they’re black, but because they’re poor and will roll over as a general rule of thumb.

      Quite frankly I believe rather than racism, that we’ve replaced those who PC has forbidden hatred. The Know Nothings require some group of people to hate for some unknown reason, and today we’re “it.”

      Unequal application of the law is supporting evidence for, but not proof of the existence of racism. In the presence of an equally viable possibility coupled with the fact that cops of color eagerly pile on I submit that the problem is not racism, it’s scapegoating.

      • darkcycle says:

        Could it be that they fear a beatdown by policefor refusing, and expect to be searched anyway? I have a friend from Chicago here, Antony, …he left to escape the gang culture after he did a little stretch at Joliet. According to him, any encounter with police by a young black male is likely to end in significant bruising. I’m inclined to suspect that non-cooperation would make that outcome certain.

      • Duncan20903 says:

        He hasn’t expressed that fear. But isn’t young anymore, he’s 53, black, lives in West Baltimore and I have asked him about getting profiled and he said he’s never had any problems with the police. He and I seem to agree that people who get profiled get profiled because they have a certain je ne sais quoi that turns on the cops. Ever since I was 16 and boldly walked into a juvenile detention facility, announced myself and told the guards I was going to visit my friend and they didn’t realize I wasn’t a State employee until I got up on the picnic table and started playing my guitar. Umm, I was 18, had hair down to the middle of my back, I was stoned to the bejeezuz, carrying a guitar, and totally ignorant of things like visiting hours and all that mumbo jumbo, hello-o-o. You can see why they mistook me for a State employee. In my utter ignorance I projected an image of being authorized, because I had no clue that they took shit like going into a correctional facility without authorization so seriously. The point is that cops just look past me for some reason. Someday I’ll tell you the one about getting on a flight out of Miami with a half kilo of coke in my carry on bag and found myself on a plane full of DEA agents on their way to Quantico for training. I did think my goose was cooked. They didn’t even realize I was on the plane.

        I’m on my way to Charm City in a few minutes and I’ll make sure to ask him the specific question you posed.

        • darkcycle says:

          Ha! Like the plane story! One thing people don’t realize is that their mental state directly effects the mental state of those around them (it’s physical and facial cues that we are unaware of on a concoius level mostly). If you are hyper aware, they will be hyper aware. Your gift Duncan, is that you are oblivious.

        • Duncan20903 says:

          Hey! I resemble that remark! You know, sometimes being clueless is the best strategy.

          The experience at the juvenile detention facility certainly taught me a couple of very profound lessons, to whit: That “if you can’t lick ’em with logic then baffle them with bullshit” is a very valid and effective strategy, and that if authorities are sufficiently embarrassed by their own contribution to a situation that they’ll just yell and act all Cartman at you but let you go rather than embarrass themselves in Court. I could have been charged with a couple of major felonies for pulling that stunt. But those guys would have had to explain why they were stupid enough to let me waltz in like I owned the facility in the first place. “Umm, well aren’t all social workers 18 year old hippies with banjos Your Honor?”

          I dreamt about the goats again last night. How can something so wrong feel so right? I am going to buy me some goats. I think they may be the key to true happiness. It sucks to have to buy a farm before I can explore this.

        • darkcycle says:

          Goats again, huh. Well, you’re safe, no Freudian insights from old darkcycle today. There are pigmy goats up the street, they sell ’em for $120.00 a piece at the little farm a few doors up from me. They’re cute as hell and they keep the lawn in their pasture at an even two inches tall. I’ve been thinking of retiring my mower (I HATE HATE HATE lawnwork, I love gardening but will go to great lengths to avoid mowing my lawn.) and getting two. If I do, you can borrow them if you like. You’ll need to handle the shipping.
          Feeling a little whocked this morning, almost like I dropped acid last night, but all I did was go to sleep. Oh well, today I will spend in a haze, I can tell already. (or maybe I’ll spend it in D.J. Short’s blueberry, I have that option…)

        • Duncan20903 says:

          I read about a guy who has a flock of goats and hires them out to clear building lots at half the price of heavy machinery and with much more ecologically friendly emissions. Gosh, he doesn’t even have to buy goat food. I hear billy goats are better security than pit bulls as they only get mad at trespassers. I’ve actually got a place picked out. Green acres is the place for me, no doubt. I really want to try some of what Hank Kimball is smoking. Everyone but poor Oliver was stoned on that show and Mr. Kimball was the local grower. IMO of course.

          Lousy sound quality, but classic Mr. Kimball. Tell me that man is not stoned, I dare you:

          “Green Acres” Theme Song – Solo by Eddie Albert (full version):

          Heck, I didn’t even realize it was released as a single. Not the same words as the show. Amusing once or twice.

  18. Landis says:

    Very good move.

  19. Duncan20903 says:

    Maybe Mr. Obama does want to get re-elected after all. He made the electric company send me a check for $305 of free money. Be still my beating heart.

    So the last candidate for POTUS which I recall trying to simply buy an election with free money was George McGovern in 1972. So I do hope that doesn’t mean that we’re going to end up with Dick W Nixon and some incompetent drunken hunter with a shotgun and a duck call in his larynx in the White House. Shit, I think I’m going to send this money to Mr. Johnson. It’s starting to smell like dirty money to me.

    Check your mail box if you have an EIN!

Comments are closed.