• DeathsEmbrace
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 hours ago

    America was involved in that trade at one point just ask the CIA and who said they ever quit?

    • Courtney (she/her/they) @lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      4 hours ago

      It’s crazy to me that “the CIA sold drugs to poor and minority communities to keep poor people down” is still treated like a conspiracy theory.

      They FULLY ADMIT TO IT!

      Like MKULTRA it doesn’t matter what the truth is.

      • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 hours ago

        To be fair, they created crack cocaine, etc., and facilitated numerous other addiction crises both in the US and abroad. 🤢🤬

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Wasn’t crack originally created by a low level LA dealer to make a bigger profit from the same product volume and THEN deliberately weaponized by the CIA to destroy (mostly black) neighborhoods?

          Or did Snowfall take even bigger liberties with regard to historical accuracy than I realized?

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        The conspiracy theory is that it was to keep poor people down.
        The reality is that they didn’t directly sell drugs, they just protected people who did to financially support terrorists, or prevented interdiction to protect traffickers who gave them information that could be used to stop drug trafficking.

        This was acceptable to them because they considered poor minority communities unimportant.

        It’s kinda worse, but it wasn’t an attack on the poor. They weren’t considered important enough to attack.
        They were just an acceptable loss if it meant some people had the money to machine gun Nicaraguan civilians.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The conspiracy theory is that it was to keep poor people down

          Which it was, however directly or indirectly.

          The reality is that they didn’t directly sell drugs

          Yeah they did. Bought drugs too.

          they just protected people who did to financially support terrorists

          And right wing foreign governments, and right wing guerillas. And to combat left wing governments, and left wing guerillas.

          it wasn’t an attack on the poor

          Yeah it was. A coordinated worldwide mission to oppress the left wing is a coordinated worldwide mission to prevent the poor from rising up and taking what’s rightfully theirs from their rich oppressors.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 minutes ago

            The implication was that they sold drugs to poor communities in America to keep poor communities in America surpressed. Recasting it by saying CIA activities in opposition to anything left of Pinochet are a directed attack on the poor is both shifting it to where I don’t think the statement was intended, and also reducing the complexity of their objective.
            They didn’t give a shit about poor people. They cared about supporting the power structures that employed them. Hurting poor people was just an expedient means towards that end.
            Yes, the power structures they supported were largely aligned with financial means because obviously they were, this is America.

            I lumped right wing dictators and guerilla groups under the umbrella of terrorism. If the shoe fits and all that.

            Citation needed on the CIA directly buying and selling drugs.

        • Courtney (she/her/they) @lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I mean, selling for profit during Iran-contra, sure.

          But to pretend the CIA wasn’t directly attempting to hurt working class people and furthering class warfare is far too forgiving and naive.

        • freagle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          They didn’t sell drugs on the street. But they did take over the British cash-cropping system of opium production in Asia and ran large scale trafficking operations.

        • CIA_chatbot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          60 minutes ago

          Nah we ran out during the Regan admin, Nanci was a beast!

      • Aqivex@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Hey! It’s almost Christmas and I’m tired of asking via unencrypted email drafts on a commercial client.

        I need drugs and operational funding if you want the stochastic chaos, my guys. Tell the Director it’s about time to flip back to chapter 1 on the playbook, we always found the last chapter the most boring part of the re-reads.

        • CIA_chatbot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          59 minutes ago

          You and every other operative out there. Drumpfs been hosing us on funding