Christopher “Dudus” Coke, who is reportedly a member of the notorious Shower Posse has been named in an indictment in New York City that could put him away for life. In response, heavy rioting by his supporters has paralyzed Kingston, Jamaica’s capitol as supporters of Mr. Coke battle in the streets with police and seek to stop the extradition of a man they see as a positive force in their community. The BBC reports as follows on the unrest in Jamaica’s capital.
39 comments:
What do you consider illegal activity worthy of judicial punishment?
Sovereignty.
Jurisdiction.
Hypocrisy.
The largest Drug Dealer in the world (US) demanding the extradition of another drug dealer based upon "evidence" obtained via illegal wiretaps strikes me as neither legal nor judicial.
It strikes me as gangstarism.
DV,
What most American don't know is that Dudas help fund and pay for Prime Minister Golding election. The US is pushing him into exposing this relationship in order to probably put their own respectable "gangsters" in. To hell with the World Police(CIA funded, East India Pirates and Drug runners mugga fugga), this is truly happening because Dudas and the Gov't is not giving our boys(CIA) their proper cut or changed the terms.
It happen in Panama before. It happens throughout the entire caribbean. In South America....We set up the Gov't and the Criminals. Read the book by Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins.
Check this :
"In a brief message to the nation Sunday after the State of Emergency was announced, Prime Minister Bruce Golding said: "Jamaica must confront this criminal element with determination and unqualified resolve."
But it was his lack of resolve to settle the extradition issue that stoked the firestorm now underway in West Kingston.
After a United States request to hand over Coke last October, Golding dawdled for several months, and finally refused, claiming that some of the evidence used to indict Coke was illegally obtained using wiretaps. Since Coke is one of his constituents - Golding is the MP for West Kingston - few believed it was anything but a stalling tactic.
When he admitted on May 11 that he had sanctioned the hiring the American law firm Manatt, Phelps and Phillips to lobby the U.S. on Coke's extradition(keep him in Jamaica), many business and civic groups called for him to resign.
The admission was seen as evidence that Jamaican politicians at the highest level are in bed with criminals. Golding then reversed himself and agreed to the extradition, and apologized to the nation on National TV.
Now the standoff in West Kingston is likely to make Jamaicans regret that they let politicians and criminals hold them hostage for so long. "It is clearly a defining moment for Jamaica," a political analyst who preferred to remain anonymous told The Root. Exactly what it will define remains to be seen."
-Jamaican writer
How is this different from Afghanistan, Karzai and the Taliban(Country,Gov't,Dealers meme)? Drugs baby, ain't nothing change -these Skull and Bones boys have always been pirates.
Thats what we do: Click here
OK, not sure where you get that the US is the largest illegal drug exporter in the world...but lets stay on point for a moment.
This man (like his father before him) is being accused of exporting illegal, highly addictive (in some instances) substances across international borders.
Is it your contention that he should be left alone? His own government seems to want to extradite him.
Not sure if you are coming down on his side, as is your habit for all outlaws, or if there is some other reason, you haven't revealed yet.
DMG
He didn't say "illegal." That's the key.
He said drug dealer. And he's right.
Prescription drugs are drugs. They may be legal, but they get you high just the same.
Hell, right now, a lot of prescription druggies in my city are having to switch over to heroin to get the same high they were getting from their pills because of drought of oxy and the like.
Just as many folks are addicted to prescription drugs as so-called "illegal drugs".
Actually DMG, many folks in his country DON"T want to extradite him. Dude was being protected by the prime minister bececause they have the same political roots.
However, the U.S. started leaning on Jamaica, talking about sanctions and other punishments, and the yardies caved.
Now dude is a dope dealer, no doubt. But, if Marc Rich can leave the country and chill in the islands until he gets a presidential pardon, I'm finding it a little hard to come down on dude.
Big Man beat me to it.
Doc, I don't buy into the notion / meme / idea / assumption / propaganda that characterizes one set of drug dealers as "bad" and the others as "good".
I don't view Christopher Coke any differently than I view Richard T. Clark, the CEO of Merck.
(Actually I view him as a much more virtuous and courageous man)
To me these are all businessmen involved in the billion dollar international traffic in narcotics.
I am leery of selective prosecutions of some drug dealers and the blind tolerance of other drug dealers.
I see Christopher Coke as the inevitable consequence of the Neocolonialism which has retarded the development of Jamaica.
I see the demand for extradition based upon evidence obtained illegally a threat to justice and a threat to sovereignty.
The people of Jamaica are dependent upon the largesse of the American government. Bruce Golding the Prime Minster (Prime Plantation Negro) is capitulating to this demand as would any slave or prison trustee capitulate to the demands of his master or prison warden.
So Doc. Yes. My characterization of this story is different from that which you see on CNN or Yahoo Messenger or Fox or Time or any of the other networks (who are effectively drug dealers too because they sell commercials to the likes of Merck and Pfizer and Baxter) because I see issues beyond the simple 'good guy' v 'bad guy', 'legal' v 'illegal' paradigm.
"How is this different from Afghanistan, Karzai and the Taliban(Country,Gov't,Dealers meme)? Drugs baby, ain't nothing change -these Skull and Bones boys have always been pirates.
Thats what we do: Click here
Hot Wax.
Once again.
You need to be teaching a mandatory class at an HBC.
Good stuff.
What do you consider illegal activity worthy of judicial punishment?
Prohibition is a demonstrably failed governance strategy.
It is patently unconstitutional, profoundly hypocritical, and extraordinarily impractical to attempt to control;
1. What a person ingests
2. States of consciousness (high?)
Yet these areas of deeply personal and indefensible encroachment comprise core themes in the perennial processes of selective force application and selective "law" enforcement.
Big Man,
"Prescription drugs are drugs. They may be legal, but they get you high just the same."
Wrong. Absolutely without a doubt wrong.
Meropenem does not get you high
Furosemide does not get you high
Heparin sulfate does not get you high
Propofol doesn't even get you high
Look, gentlemen and ladies, you all toss around alot of terms incorrectly.
Drug dealer has a connotation of illegality. I know why our host was using it...in an attempt to slide off the topic of illegal drugs. I get it. Now let's get back on the topic of this guy and why or why not he should be extradited. I'm not convinced he should or should not be yet. That's why I'm interested.
To be clear, if someone is inappropriately prescribing medication for purposes other than amelioration of symptoms, improving organ function or any other medically necessary reason I consider this unethical and likely illegal. At that point, they are equal in my eyes to dealers of currently illegal substances.
Crack cocaine has no medicinal purpose (cocaine in small amounts is sometimes used as an anesthetic for ocular procedures).
Heroin has no medicinal purpose.
Marijuana has a medicinal purpose for a select group of patients.
Methamphetamine has no medicinal purpose.
Alcohol has no medicinal purpose outside of alleviation of the symptoms of withdrawal (I really enjoyed ordering 2 beers with each meal as an intern for a patient...it kept him from going into withdrawal probably better than Ativan).
OK, can we for once, get passed the pharmaceutical topic that's been beaten to death here? Please? For one topic?
I'm interested in why Kingston is rioting...not a diatribe on Merck.
DMG
That was horrible man.
Yeah, some presciption drugs DON'T get you high, other prescription drugs DO get you high.
You understood that, so I don't know why you listed the drugs that DON'T get you high.
DV's point, which I think has merit, is that the United States has decided that NOW cocaine, heroin, marijuana and the like are illegal drugs and their distribution makes you a drug dealer worthy of scorn and imprisonment.
It wasn't too long ago that many of those same drugs were perfectly legal and in the case of cocaine, used as supplements to encourage the consumption of commerical sold products.
Hell, we all know the history of prohibition and the bootleggers (Kennedy) who got rich from "drug dealing." Don't mention the fact that weed is outlawed to protect the economic interests of one of the most unscrupulous rich men in American history. (Hearst.)
These are all salient points because they shape my opinon on the extradition of this man. He is being pursued for selling drugs that the United States has deemed "illegal" because of their dangerous nature and the havoc they cause in communities. This is hypocritical given the fact that the United States sanctions the selling prescriptions drugs which induce many of the exact same reactions and the makers of those drugs are not labeled "drug dealers." It's also hypocritical given the United States selective enforcement of its extradition guidelines, and its past history in regards to allowing the widespread transportation of illegal drugs into this country. It's even more hypocritical given America's belligerence when other countries try to ask the United States to follow their laws.
While DV is known to change the subject, in this case his comment had merit and articulated his position and the position of many others. The United States selectively decides who it wants to extradite, it selectively decides which foreign countries it wants to sanction and it selectively decides which drugs are "illegal."
All of these selections are tinged with hypocrisy and are relevant to any discussion on whether America's actions in the extradition case have merit.
Finally, I won't shed tears for dude if he goes to prison, even with this countries hypocrisy, because I think he understands how much damage illegal narcotics do in the communities of black folks. Despite the discussions about the hypocrisy of the U.S. drug policies, the reality is that crack and heroin are bad news for black folks. And dude is willingly supplying black folks with them.
Big Man,
No, I did not understand what you meant. There are a very small number of prescription medications that may be used to "get high". Make that clear. Drugs are not drugs.
Despite all the handwringing Merck is not the huslter on the street. The hustler on the street isn't selling antibiotics. He's not selling Insulin, or anti-cancer medications, or anything other than stuff to get high.
Be clear.
Big Man,
The U.S. didn't JUST decide that. Society on a whole has decided that, whether you agree or not.
"This is hypocritical given the fact that the United States sanctions the selling prescriptions drugs which induce many of the exact same reactions and the makers of those drugs are not labeled "drug dealers."
Get OFF your soap-box Big Man! The U.S. doesn't sanction Morphine Sulfate to be sold on the street corner. I don't even send patients out of the ICU let alone home with it. And the as far as swallowed forms, they don't get more than4-5 days worth, then I cut them off. I don't tolerate abuse.
Some of your other points are valid, but if this is going to turn into another Anti-Pharma screed, I might as well sign off now. I'm interested in knowing why folks are burning their own homes for this guy and his gang. And don't give me the hero, legit business man bullshit. He's selling recreation that's addictive and harmful to ones body. I can agree with that, shit our host can agree with that.
Do you think it's hypocrisy for the U.S. to lay sanctions on countries who still have slaves? Just because it was done here in the past, doesn't mean should fight against it now.
Come on Big Man, give me something better than that.
The U.S. didn't JUST decide that. Society on a whole has decided that, whether you agree or not.
lol,
C'mon man..., stop.
That thurr's a 9.9998 on the 10 point Thordaddy scale of wicky wack ahistorical and factually erroneous rhetoric..,
He's selling recreation that's addictive and harmful to ones body. I can agree with that, shit our host can agree with that.
The only reason it's harmful is because it's illegal and there are no quality controls in place - other than black market purity competition controls.
The actual cost to feed these "turrible" addictions, if legalized and supplied at a modest markup over cost would be a few pennies a day.
Not only is the poor drug quality an artifact of illegality, the crime and criminality precipitated by the astonishingly inflated street prices of "contraband" recreational drugs breeds disruptions in the community, unnatural wealth accumulations for dealers, and the genuine threats to status quo governance you find in nearly failed states like Mexico.
Do you think it's hypocrisy for the U.S. to lay sanctions on countries who still have slaves? Just because it was done here in the past, doesn't mean should fight against it now.
Dayyum Dood!!!!
You might need to see your sports medicine homey after turning so hard and sharp on the subject.
sheeeeeiiiiiitttttttt........,
I got contact whiplash off that muhphuggah right thurr.
However, just to humor the red herring you proffered, the U.S. needs to STFU until it frees all its non-violent drug "offenders" and liberates the many millions shackled for life under the criminal injustice of the new Jim Crow.
What needs to end right now is the insane, unconstitutional, hypocritical, and utterly unproductive drug prohibition, period. This is the thinnest of all possible pretexts for meddling in the affairs of allegedly sovereign states. Not a good look...,
You put a radical liberal/jihadist hybrid in the Oval Office and you expect this government to act with principle?
Why?
He's getting extradited BECAUSE HE CAN BE EXTRADITED...
BO HAS A LOT TO PROVE...
And them fools are destroying because they can and no one will stop them...
Radical Autonomy all about...
Let the clashes begin...
The BEST WTF? in regards to this matter. You gotta read the Jamaican newspaper. The Observer "Editorial column" viewpoint. My Rastafarian brothers seems hip to the US bullsh#t and more....
No to Dudus extradition, no to US demands
Click here
"There might be connections between the Buju Banton arrest, the courageous stand of Prime Minister Golding against the homosexuality that the US is promoting worldwide, and the Coke case. Thus certain Jamaican factions, some diaspora entities, and of course, those clandestine forces promoting US interests online and elsewhere, are now swarming like vultures toward this Dudus distraction to help the US accomplish its hidden agendas."
It is not totally unwise to play it safe at times, but members of this camp must remember that imperialism is no respecter of persons. It would be better for this guild to remain quietly neutral instead of bad-mouthing Jamaica. Private sector groups, Opposition spokespersons, church organisations and media houses that kowtow to the US position in this Coke affair might be bordering on treachery, especially when some of them played similar roles in the Manley years.
The extradition treaty between Jamaica and the US is lopsided and pragmatically flawed. It smells like an agreement between entities, one of which is more equal than the other. In its Narcotics Report the US admits that 70 per cent of guns used in crimes in Jamaica come from the US, yet there is still only a one-way extradition from the weaker nation to the other. Most of the agreements between the US and other nations mentioned in that report simply give licence for the US to have free run in those countries which in turn give up their sovereignty to US imperialism. Jamaica already suffers too much from such manipulation and exploitation from European, North American, and other nations and NGO groups.
This fight for Jamaican sovereignty and justice for Coke should not be a Golding gladiator bout but a cause in which every single conscientious Jamaican should stand up against US bullying.
-GET UP ! STAND UP! DON'T GIVE UP THE FIGHT.
GET UP! STAND UP! STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!
BOB MARLEY.
Cnu said what I was going to say.
"Society as a whole?"
WTH is that? In what alternate universe is that true? Do you know the history of how drugs like Ecstacy, weed and coke became illegal? It's wasn't "society" as a whole any more than Prohibition was driven by "society as whole."
These laws, like most laws, are the result of concerted efforts by lobbying groups bent on advancing their interests, it has nothing to do with "society as a whole."
As far as my soapbox, I actually had to deal with the "pain clinics" running pill mills that had to be shutdown because they were ruining communities. I have dealt with the cops and other "doctor shopping" and managing to garner multiple 30 days supplies of prescription drugs that they in turn sell on the street for profit.
Prescription drug abuse is MORE prevalent than illegal drug abuse.
It's not a screed against Big Pharma, it's a statement of fact. The United States government has decided that certain mood-altering drugs deserve to be legal, while others deserve to be illegal.
And anybody who thinks that decision was based on what "society as a whole" thinks is fooling themselves.
So the folks in Jamrock don't all hate this dope dealer dude because their lives are improved DAILY by him while they don't see much help at all from the U.S. government.
They aren't worried about what the U.S. deems "illegal" anymore than United States citizens are worried about what Jamaica deems illegal when we make our daily choices. They are looking at what works for them.
The extradition treaty between Jamaica and the US is lopsided and pragmatically flawed. It smells like an agreement between entities, one of which is more equal than the other. In its Narcotics Report the US admits that 70 per cent of guns used in crimes in Jamaica come from the US, yet there is still only a one-way extradition from the weaker nation to the other
Thanks Wax.
Come on DMG, see the forest and the trees. The U.S. and European powers have worked for years to economically disadvantage countries like Jamaica and Haiti. Using its economica leverage, the U.S. has created lopsided and unjust treaties and agreements with these nations that absolutely reek of hypocrisy. This current dust-up is just a consequence of them.
Bottom line, the U.S. would not tolerate any other nation coming here and making demands on what we better do. We would not have that. Obviously, some sovereignity is more sovereign than others.
Sorry folks, I was busy yesterday. Now Craig, you are my boy...but comparing ANYTHING I say to Thordaddy is fighting words. Period.
What was untrue about my statement? The United States didn't declare cocaine illegal yesterday just to get that Jamaican cat. That much is obvious.
"The only reason it's harmful is because it's illegal and there are no quality controls in place - other than black market purity competition controls"
Maybe you were actually high when you wrote that, I can't tell. If a person wants to snort coke, smoke crack, or shoot meth...that's their business...but the fact remains that the sale of such substances remains illegal, both substances are highly addictive (for real, not just the bullshit about addiction written about here), and are TRULY detrimental to ones health. Methamphetamine is one of the most addictive substances there is. Don't think so...go try some.
Not sure why you are getting things twisted, I'm stating fact. Again, whether you all like it or not...it is ILLEGAL. Has been for awhile.
"The actual cost to feed these "turrible" addictions, if legalized and supplied at a modest markup over cost would be a few pennies a day. Not only is the poor drug quality an artifact of illegality, the crime and criminality precipitated by the astonishingly inflated street prices of "contraband" recreational drugs breeds disruptions in the community, unnatural wealth accumulations for dealers, and the genuine threats to status quo governance you find in nearly failed states like Mexico"
Not disputing that, and I agree with most of your statement. I hope substances like Marijuana is legalized. Meth, heroin, crack? No. Not at all. Take care of a few of these folks and you might reconsider your desire to make it more widely available. And if these were purified (and we've occasionally seen uncut super pure versions of cocaine hit the streets with horrible consequences) the bad side effects don't go away.
And NOBODY has said anything about the people farming, and processing these drugs, or the ill affects on their health. It's not a victimless crime. And the way Nike's are made in the third world, I don't think the condition of those processing coke would improve much...on the contrary the increased demand due to legalization of that particular drug would probably worsen the situation.
It's like Big Man lumping all Prescription medications into one lump and saying they are addictive. I'll be the first person to stand up and say legalize Marijuana. Cocaine, heroin and synthetic methamphetamine no. It's not a matter of profitability, and safe use. There is no safe use with these three. The risk to health outweighs any recreational benefit.
Bottom line. I'm not going to rally around ANYbody who helps bring crack, heroin or meth to our shores. I say fuck him. Let him rot. Plenty of other black men and women who need our attention more than this dude.
Doing good for the community. Sheeeiiit. Tossing some trinkets down to the have-nots isn't altruistic, it's as simple as purchasing loyalty and human shields to keep his ass out of jail.
Now Craig, you are my boy...but comparing ANYTHING I say to Thordaddy is fighting words. Period.
rotflmbao..,
aight magne I'm sorry.
I got caught up.
I won't let it happen again.
{I'm between grinds, so I'll have to come back to your full argument here in a little while - but I didn't want to leave that ragged edge hanging out unaddressed in the aether}
DMG
If you have oversimplified the opposing opinions enough (while at the same time lamenting the simplfying of your own opinions) let's get real.
You just wrote this:
Not sure why you are getting things twisted, I'm stating fact. Again, whether you all like it or not...it is ILLEGAL. Has been for awhile
What exactly does this "fact" have to do with the discussion here on this site?
Have you failed to grasp the central point that the "law" is an instrument of control used by the elite to maintain power and wealth?
What is illegal can change at the drop of the dime, and as I pointed out, it changes constantly to satisfy the desires of those with money and power.
As I and many others have noted, the United States policy on "illegal" and "legal" narcotics reeks of hypocrisy. Furthermore, your attempts to paint my comments as the ranting of someone against all prescription drugs is asinine. Where exactly did "all" prescription drugs would get you high? I didn't use that qualifier, you read it like that and ignored my clarification.
There are several prescription drugs, diazepam, aloprozam, oxycodone and hydrocodone to name a few, that create many of the same mind-altering states as the so-called "illegal drugs."
And many of them have the same additive qualities. The only difference is that government has decided that providing them to folks with a prescription outweighs the risks of people abusing them.
Can you explain why?
Of course crack, heroin and meth are addictive, but as a physician you well know that addiction is first and foremost a mental state, followed by a physical state. Contrary to popular myth, you don't not get physically addicted to ANY drug on the first hit. You get mentally addicted, followed by a physical dependence on the substance. This is true for both "legal" and "illegal" mind-altering drugs. Therefore, the line of argument that the addictive nature of crack, heroin and meth justifies their being outlawed rings false to me.
In addition, who called drug dealing a victimless crime? Point to that comment please. Where did I say that this drug dealer was a good guy or an asset to the community, in my opinion?
I said that the people who are rioting see him as an asset. They've decided, for whatever reason, that his good deeds outweigh his bad. They've decided that they'd rather side with him than the United States. Judging from that editorial, maybe some of them have peeped the ridiculousness of the United States position on extradition, and are tired of the U.S. targeting drug dealers but allowing arms dealers to flood the island with weapons.
The bottom line is you see dude as a dope dealer who is getting what's coming to him. Apparently, that's the end of hte argument in your mind.
Consequently, you've ignored the larger discussion about whether drugs should be illegal, whether the United States should be taking this sort of action in sovereign nations, the power dynamic between the U.S. and Jamaica and the hypocrisy inherent in the prescription drug versus illegal drug debate.
All of those things contribute to the opinions of many of the folks who've commented here, many of whom could care less about dude's individual circumstances because of the larger issues involved.
"couldn't care less."
Leave for a few minutes and it's all but over with...., I don't really have much to add to what Big Man wrote, some minor errata which I'll address forthwith;
Me**am**etam**e is one of the most addictive substances there is. Don't think so...go try some.
How did THAT even get into this discussion?
Dudas is alleged to be the head of the Shower Posse and he's been indicted for sensei and lady - no m*th.
I'm not a fan of stimulants - frankly - their recreational value is as highly debatable as that of alcohol, and, their physical and mental health consequences should be considered in a similarly negative vein. That said, my entire argument goes to the contrived system - which Big Man thoroughly addressed - in which legality, sovreignty, and power dynamics are the horn of contention.
To Big Man's excellent question about "legal" mind-altering drugs, I'd round out the list with all the serotonin-reuptake inhibitors, of which Prozac and Paxil are probably the best known, as well as the stimulants Ritalin and Adderall prescribed for children and which constitute the number one drugs of abuse in most schools in the U.S. today.
There are several prescription drugs, diazepam, aloprozam, oxycodone and hydrocodone to name a few, that create many of the same mind-altering states as the so-called "illegal drugs."
And many of them have the same additive qualities. The only difference is that government has decided that providing them to folks with a prescription outweighs the risks of people abusing them.
Can you explain why?
Please do explain, because we both know that this is a profoundly gray area where science abruptly ends and that pretty much all that the legal proponents can hang their hats on by way of explanation or rationalization is "art".
"Prohibition is a demonstrably failed governance strategy." CNu
All of you have missed it.
"Prohibition" is an extremely effective governance strategy.
The goal of this government is not to assist and empower but to thwart and imprison.
"Prohibition" fills prisons and, ironically, keeps people drugged.
An arcane and selectively enforced policy of prohibition is highly effective ... if your goal is to maintain the plantation.
The "State Department" tasked that little Plantation Negro Prime Minister down there to deliver Coke or risk being cut off from the corporate / fascist / us government nipple.
The people of Tivoli Gardens said ... Nah.
We not giving the brother up on GP.
US Plantation Negros can't even fathom resisting the feds.
Big Man,
What does the fact that those drugs are illegal have to do with anything?
Because you guys keep talking about how they SHOULDN'T be, and how this guy isn't doing anything outside of the law. Whatever. I'm not interested in technicalities of gathering evidence. Everybody IN his neighborhood knows he's the dope man. It's not like he's hiding it.
"Have you failed to grasp the central point that the "law" is an instrument of control used by the elite to maintain power and wealth?"
Yeah, I get where you guys are going with this. I'm just not purchasing that load today. Because even you know what you wrote is a bunch of bullshit. Next time somebody breaks into your house, or somebody mugs somebody you know, I want you to repeat that shit.
And you are WAY THE FUCK in left field saying the only difference between alprazolam and crack is that the government sanctions one. Just stop. What you are saying is beyond stupid, and I think you already know that. I'm not going to argue about legal medications that serve an important purpose in Critical Care medicine to recreational street drugs. You are smarter than that. I expect that from Wax, not you.
Addiction is a biochemical state. Remember, I'm the physician. You said so yourself.
somebody needs a history lesson....
The History of Opium and The History of How the Pharmaceutical Industry Intentionally Created Drug Addictions
Click here
"In the mid-nineteenth Century, Chinese immigrants had appeared in the United States in large numbers to help build railways and work with California mines. Opium use had become a part of their culture, and opium, along with the Chinese, were demonized as being destructive to the youth. Dr. John Witherspoon, who would later become president of the American Medical Association (AMA), told allopaths to search for a cure for opium addictions, and a morphine alternative. The alternative was to be non-addictive.
In 1874, an English pharmacist, C. R. Alder Wright had boiled morphine and acetic acid together, producing diacetylmorphine. Diacetylmorphine was synthesized and marketed commercially by the German pharmaceutical giant, Bayer. In 1898, Bayer launched the best-selling drug-brand of all time, Heroin."
and also
When will we learn from history what to expect from these people and their "helpful" chemical "improvements" upon nature? You will see this identical pattern for all other illegal narcotics, like for instance, cocaine. They created all of the addictive drug monsters, and they got the results that they wanted. In fact, you can technically still get a doctor's prescription for cocaine, and even get it filled at certain pharmacies. Will the public ever see the pattern?
The reason why diseases are never cured with modern medicine is because curing is not as profitable as creating life-long drug addicts. This is why all the diseases are "chronic" now, and why the "medicines" seem only to perpetuate the diseases that they are supposedly meant to "treat" (but never ever cure). The system is broken by design to keep us dependent. Why do you think they "treat" cancer with extreme carcinogens like radiation? Radiation must be one of the most safe and effective health benefiting treatments, because they just cannot find that elusive cure, right?
The biggest difference between your doctor and the local drug dealer is that the drug dealer is considerably more honest about how he earns his money.
India produces about half the opium utilized by the world's pharmaceutical industries to produce codeine, morphine, narcotine, thebaine, papaverine, and other medical products, however our boys are helping out with the extra production in Afghanistan and cutting into some of India and Pakistan's business.
CIA, Heroin Still Rule Day in Afghanistan
Click here
Afghanistan now supplies over 90 percent of the world’s heroin, generating nearly $200 billion in revenue. Since the U.S. invasion on Oct. 7, 2001, opium output has increased 33-fold (to over 8,250 metric tons a year).
The U.S. has been in Afghanistan for over seven years, has spent $177 billion in that country alone, and has the most powerful and technologically advanced military on Earth. GPS tracking devices can locate any spot imaginable by simply pushing a few buttons.
Still, bumper crops keep flourishing year after year, even though heroin production is a laborious, intricate process. The poppies must be planted, grown and harvested; then after the morphine is extracted it has to be cooked, refined, packaged into bricks and transported from rural locales across national borders. To make heroin from morphine requires another 12-14 hours of laborious chemical reactions. Thousands of people are involved, yet—despite the massive resources at our disposal—heroin keeps flowing at record levels.
some of yall still sleeping.
The US has is the Drug Dealer.. the little guy Coke in Jamrock? get real!
DMG
All right Doc.
Tell me, were not heroin and cocaine used by physicians to treat patients before their addictive nature was deemed too dangerous?
Was not Ecstacy initially prescribed by psychiatrists to the victims of extreme emotional trauma?
Doc, you saying "This isn't true" doesn't exactly make it so. Furthermore, you are having a hard time actually reading what I write and not attaching your own false interpetation of my words.
I wrote:
And many of them have the same additive qualities. The only difference is that government has decided that providing them to folks with a prescription outweighs the risks of people abusing them.
Where did I say that the prescription drugs I named are AS addictive as crack and heroin (although from what I've read Oxycontin and heroin ain't too different.) I said the drugs possess the same "addictive qualities."
You can crush, cook and mainline many of those same precription drugs just like you do with heroin or cocaine. Hell, the problem with crack isn't its composition, but the way its ingested. You already know that smoking a drug gets you MUCH higher than snorting it or even mainlining it, which is why the crack high is so much more intense and addictive.
This discussion isn't about "technicalities" it's about "nuances." There is a key and important difference between the too words.
Furthermore, the argument that I would call the police, or use the court system does not change the fact that those systems were created for a specific purpose. All it takes is a simple reading of history to understand how the jurisprudence in this country was developed and how the civil laws were designed to protect the elite. That has NOTHING to do with whether I will call a law enforcement officer if I'm a victim of a crime. Besides, are you telling me that you've chosen to ignore all of the studies and books written about the gross inequities in the justice system, particularly related to race and class, because you would call the cops if you got mugged? That's an asinine argument.
Doc, I know that addicition is a biochemical response. I know that drugs activate certain sections of the brain and produce a feeling of pleasure.
But, I also know that addicts FIRST become addicted to the feeling before they are EVER addicted physically to the drug. That's why it typically takes time to build up a serious drug habit, mainly because addicts are consistently chasing those first few highs which can never be duplicated without increasing amounts of narcotics, which in turn increase the bodies dependence on the drug. Saying it's a "biochemical" response does not invalidate my point, and I'm surprised at you thinking it does.
Finally, where did I say dude wasn't outside of the law? Once again, I suggest you re-read my comments and note what I actually wrote. Yes, this dude broke the law. My point was that just because you break a law doesn't mena that you've automatically done something wrong. YOu seemed to arguing, and correct me if I'm wrong, that since dude was outside of the law it really wasn't a big deal what happened to him. That's crap to me.
Unjust laws should be broken. Now, we can debate whether this country's drug laws or unjust or hypocritical, but we cannot debate whether we should blindly follow the law regardless of what it says. That is stupid.
The crux of your argument appears to be "This dude deals illegal drugs, therefore whatever happens to him is fine." You've ignored the issue of how drugs are deemed illegal, you've ignored the issue of illegal wiretaps (which you deem a technicality), you've ignored the issue of sovereignity, and you've ignored the United STates bullying posture.
I mean, if you're going to ignore all the salient points people raise, how do you expect to have a debate or discussion?
That's an example of :
Framing
Semmelweis reflex
Big Man,
I know you worked long and hard on this last post.
The drugs you listed have no therapeutic value other than what I already listed. That is why we don't use them or only in very specific controlled situations. But what does that have to do with recreational use? You are reaching here, and I'm not sure why.
You are attempting to place legitimate medication on the same level as crack because you don't understand the biochemistry or the concept of addiction. And you demonstrated this when you said it was "mental"...just what do you think that means?
"But, I also know that addicts FIRST become addicted to the feeling"
Just what do you think this means? How do they become addicted to the feeling? IT'S BIOCHEMISTRY. IT IS LIGAND AND RECEPTOR, and downstream activation, and feedback loops. So yes, I did invalidate your point.
"My point was that just because you break a law doesn't mena that you've automatically done something wrong."
Seems to be the definition of "breaking the law". Now dealing crack to 14 year olds is somehow an unjust law? Man get the fuck outta here with that nonsense. You are as bad as MOTI defending Weezy and Minaj as artists.
Fuck Dudas, I hope they drag his sorry ass off the island. Then handwringing negros like you march around the prison demanding freedom for a "political" prisoner. While real political prisoners won't get the time of day from you. People standing up for justice, not drugs and crime.
I haven't ignored anything. I'm just not making excuses for drug dealers. I know selling crack and heroin is a crime. You know it. He knows it. It's not that hard not to sell crack...or become a notable drug trafficker. Get real. And don't invoke Semmelweis.
I cannot believe you are actually moaning about this guy?
Doc
Again, do you actually read comments?
Let me re-post what I wrote up high on the thread:
Finally, I won't shed tears for dude if he goes to prison, even with this countries hypocrisy, because I think he understands how much damage illegal narcotics do in the communities of black folks. Despite the discussions about the hypocrisy of the U.S. drug policies, the reality is that crack and heroin are bad news for black folks. And dude is willingly supplying black folks with them.
So, despite that comment, I'm a "hand wringing Negro" ready to call this dude a political prisoner?
And you have the audacity to complain about Denmark Vesey's antics?
Breaking the law means you've done something wrong?
Are you that woefully unprepared for this discussion? Do I need to list all the examples of "breaking a law" that were actually just?
You want to make this about dude, but I've already told I moved past that, and I even explained my feelings on this dude's individual situation to satisfy your request.
The problem isn't anybody feeling sorry this cat, the problem is that your arguments have been piss poor no matter how many times you pat your self on the back.
The argument that illegality is anything more than violating a set of rules created by those with the power to create rules is asinine.
The idea that "society as a whole" creates laws is naive and asinine.
The argument that oxycontin and heroin are not very similar and abused at similar rates is BEYOND asinine given the current statistics about drug abuse available with a simple internet search.
The idea that doctors have things under control as it relates to distribution of prescription drugs, particularly those I mentioned, is either woefully ignorant of the realties on the street, or just asinine.
I ain't even gonna bring up how you avoided several other arguments mainly because you just didn't want to deal with them.
Bottom line, you failed son. Miserably. You can pretend it didn't happen, throw up the facade of superiority and resort to strawman arguments and ad hominem attacks if that makes you feel better, but the reality is the reality.
You've been reduced to attributed thoughts, feelings and comments to me that I simply did not make, taking my comments out of context and refusing to admit reality.
Now, given your common complaints, who do you sound like?
Oh yeah.
DMG
Explain to us laymen how exactly this ligand and receptor things works.
Do these chemicals create certain feelings in the brain? Does the brain then crave more of those feelings?
What exactly is that you have a problem with in my comment? Did it lack the proper jargon? Were you unable to comprehend its gist because of this absence?
Do you dispute my comment that physical addiction does not occur with one hit? Do dispute my assertion that the feelings narcotics users get from using drugs is what draws them back until the develop a physical dependence?
What exactly are you disputing?
Do I need to pull the links about the rise in prescription drug use? Do I need provide to provide supporting documents showing the most commonly abused prescription drugs and the "illegal" drugs that give a similar high?
Federal info on prescription drug abuse and its prevalence.
Don't forget this link from the DEA.
@Big man
"Bottom line, you failed son. Miserably. You can pretend it didn't happen, throw up the facade of superiority and resort to strawman arguments and ad hominem attacks if that makes you feel better, but the reality is the reality."-BM
Well said.
That is all dude ever do....is this your first time ever experiencing it? :)
dude will never click on your links -trust me.
If DV or I gave you a dollar for every time we thought that , you would be a rich man.
Not much about gaining knowledge.....just battling. It is such a shame.
Any way BM, I am interested in your opinion that the same thing happened to his Dad (jim Brown).
Don't you find that very odd?
Wax
Not really. I mean, I would imagine that the son took over his dad's operation.
And truth be told, when you're dealing in the drugs this cat was dealing in, the outcome is damn near pre-ordained. His dad's situation fits.
I got that big man, however the same request by the US.
The same political stance by Jamaica in the 80's etc., etc., .
You could almost bring his story and his Dad's story and they are so interchangeable it is amazing. 30 years and Bamm! the same story. A fuggin mirror with extradition request etc. etc.
Seems like an episode of Lost.
His Dad was going to role on all his US connects and got burned up in his cell.
I wonder if he will also? :)
In October '09 Golding flipped Obama the bird and said no to the extradition. December '09 Jamaica (Golding) borrowed 127 million from the IMF & the World Bank(sters), with Obama and Holder as their enforcers. By this month Golding, now bows to the pressure of his own government, since the U.S. cancelled visas. Many of the MP's hold dual citizenship with JA and the U.S. Now, Golding had to act. Pressure from the "enforcers", pressure from his own people MP's no matta JLP or PNP pressure was on. The government of JA, has very few if any safety nets for the general population, meaning there is not "welfare." Thus, the Dons take care of many of these communities with their drug money. Many singers and Jamaican DJ's (rappers) do the same. They feed, cloth and help the people in communities find work or they work for the recording company. Sad sitch there.
I saw that when I was over there and talked to cats.
Big Man,
"Do I need to list all the examples of "breaking a law" that were actually just?"
Yes, as a matter of fact you do, if you are attempting to compare the pursuit of Dudus to that of those unjustly accused.
This is either a conversation about particular unjust laws or it isn't. You haven't pointed to a particular law that's unjust, you've only alluded to them in an attempt to cast doubt on whether pursuit of a known drug trafficker is righteous.
What do you mean you've moved past it? The whole thread is about Dudu.
You are throwing out half-assed garbage and my arguments are poor? Big Man please. All of your attempts to place this man in a sympathetic light have failed. And that's what you are attempting, despite your occasional sentences otherwise.
I never said society as a whole creates laws. I said :"The U.S. didn't JUST decide that. Society as a whole has decided that, whether you agree or not."
Name some places that have signs up saying, "Crackheads, Meth, and heroin addicts WELCOME".
Stop acting like old rich white guys in a leather chair club one day decided to make crack cocaine illegal. Who if not society as whole decided heroin should be made illegal? Please, without typing illuminati, tell me who made that decision...with a straight face please.
Big Man, I don't know, nor do I care why your panties are all twisted today. I know you think you are telling me off, and that's cute and all, but you haven't made your point. Instead, you make a half ass attempt at talking about the science behind addiction. You could have at least looked it up and read a little about neurochemistry before hand. And NO. I'm not explaining shit to you. Go drag your lazy ass to the library, or better yet Google it. I'm on call to explain and point you in the right direction all the time. Do your own work. You are the one who brought "Mental and physical", but forgot biochemical.
Your links really don't mean shit Big Man. Anything can be abused. The difference there is no Cocaine, heroin or meth "abuse". USING coke at all outside of a ophthalmologists office is abuse. USING heroin at all is abuse. USING methamphetamine (and I'm talking about the substance made in trailer parks..) is abuse. Why? There is no safe nor legitimate use of any of these substances, and you aren't being monitored by anyone who might recognize the signs that you have developed a lethal arrhythmia, respiratory depression, or . But I feel like I'm repeating myself.
But I actually was interested in why poor people in a poor neighborhood would act as human shields for a drug trafficker. You turned it into a conversation about unjust law...which this is not an example of.
The man is trafficking drugs INTO the United States. Why would you think extradition is unjust? Extradition means the country harboring the criminal puts his ass on a plane and sends said plane to another country. This is extradition, not rendition. If it were the latter, I might be against it for other reasons.
The U.S. has merely asked Jamaica (probably forcefully) to turn him over. If they don't want to turn him over, I'm sure there are $$ that don't need to find their way to Kingston.
And you know what, 60 people are dead defending some guy who insures some neighborhoods stay poor, in his country and ours, but you are concerned that he might not get "justice"? That a wire tap was obtained illegally? (Which is disputed). He'll gladly sacrifice his entire neighborhood, and you are worried the U.S. is being a bully? Wow.
The Jamaican PM has been reluctant to hand him over because he knows he would cease to be PM.
Post a Comment