RadioRote

The rest is silence.
(Hamlet V.ii. 367)

RadioRote #2

News  Flash 

Table of Contents

Contact Us

White Rose

“Some people think it’s inappropriate to draw a moral line. Not me.” (George W. Bush Candidacy Announcement speech, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. June 12, 1999). 

  The Bush Family and Collective Amnesia

Précis:

The new Bush Administration is forging ahead with the notion that Americans who purchase illegal drugs are, in good part,  to be blamed for supporting terrorism. If the  administration is laying the groundwork to add "aiding and abetting terrorism" to those caught with drugs, then the question is how arbitrary will the White House be when deciding which drug pushers, fellow travelers and terrorists are "friendly" to the administration, and which neighborhood junkie should be punished for it. 

Report:

The Bush administration began a $180 million ad blitz in February of 2002 designed to equate drug use in America as a tool that supports terrorists.

The White House is gambling that the experience of September 11th will stir the American conscience against buying drugs.  The idea the White House is pushing is that if people stop buying drugs, the extremist groups will lose a major revenue source. 

Ostensibly, Bush's campaign will ultimately enhance the lives of all Americans. But Radiorote thinks it bears an interesting parallel as well as a duplicitous connection to just such another campaign in our recent past--a campaign that had nefarious results.

Bush's anti-drug campaign is similar to that of the Reagan-Bush administration of the 1980’s. One of their public relation “family values” schemas was in urging drug users to “Just Say No” to further drug use. Although the Reagan-Bush administration banged their drums loudly in public over their fight against drug abuse, they simultaneously participated in a predatory process towards expanding the base of several Narco-Terrorism networks themselves. 

A well known episode of the Reagan-Bush White House in allowing the transfer and sale of drugs to prop up a regime "friendly" to the US was during the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980's. The CIA Inspector-General, Fredrick Hitz,  investigated the allegations of the his agency's involvement in an illegal drug and gun running scheme between the Contras and the US . His findings led two citizens to file a lawsuit against several US agencies and cabinet members for their complicity in drug laundering during that 'dirty little war .' Based on the findings of the CIA Inspector General, the plaintiffs sued the government for many reasons including the scenario below: 

On March 16, 1998, CIA Inspector General Fredrick Hitz appeared before the House Intelligence Committee to report on his investigation of the CIA, the Contras and crack cocaine.  Hitz testified that beginning in 1982, the CIA entered into an undisclosed agreement with the Department of Justice, allowing CIA officers to refrain from reporting drug trafficking by its "agents, assets, and non-staff employees."  Hitz admitted that "there are instances where the CIA did not in an expeditious or consistent fashion, cut off relationships with individuals supporting the Contra program who were alleged to have engaged in drug trafficking activity, or take action to resolve the allegation."

When asked by Congressman Norman Dicks of Washington, "Did any of these allegations involve trafficking in the United States?", Hitz's answer was "yes."  Hitz acknowledged that the CIA knew of drug trafficking allegations "regarding dozens of individuals and a number of companies connected in some fashion to the Contra program or the Contra movement"....

Hitz also found that even after Attorney General William French Smith was "advised that a question arose regarding the need to add narcotics violations to the list of reportable non-employee crimes," Smith wrote CIA Director William Casey a letter on 2/11/82, stating that "no formal requirement regarding the reporting of narcotics violations has been included in these procedures." (1).

The Department of Justice also performed a limited investigation into these allegations and concluded that drug dealers, during the Reagan-Bush administration, may have been assisted in smuggling drugs into  California through the CIA  or their allies, the Contras. This activity was believed to have  been initiated to finance the war in Central America. In one very large drug seizure in San Francisco, the CIA asked the courts to return the money from the seizure because it belonged to the Contras: The defendant involved was a drug smuggler named Zavala: 

The OIG (RadioRote: "OIG" is "Office of Inspector General") found conflicting information about the decision to return the money to Zavala. CIA documents state that the money was returned to Zavala, and not used in the trial, at the request of the CIA. In contrast, the former U.S. Attorney and his deputies contend that the money was returned for purely economic reasons and that they had no contact with the CIA. Only AUSA Mark Zanides remembers any contact with the CIA on this matter.

The following facts are clear. The CIA had a belief, albeit a mistaken one, that one of its former assets was about to be deposed in the Zavala case. The CIA decided that it was not in its interest to have the former asset deposed, partly for fear of public disclosure of allegations that CIA-provided money was being diverted into, or that CIA assets were involved in, the drug trade (2).

There have been several books written “from the inside” on how government agencies that are responsible for protecting the country from narcotics and terrorism have, themselves, stood in the way of their own missions. One known primary source is the 27-year DEA veteran, Michael Levine, whose books The White Lie and Queen of Cocaine detail how his undercover work was sometimes scuttled by his supervisors or ignored by other Law Enforcement officials when those he busted were politically connected to a politician or an agency; or if the drug lord was considered an “anti-Communist” ally of the United States. Thus, in the  Reagan-Bush administration, being "anti-Communist" allowed despots and narco-terrorists  a good amount of leeway for unchecked extra-curricular activity. 

 In one such event, Levine claims to have busted Jose Gasser, who came from one of the most powerful families in Bolivia. The Gasser family had strong ties with the World Anti-Communist League (3).  The WACL is a group whose members are made up of far-Right Wing and NAZI groups, reportedly involved in financing their organization through global drug smuggling,  gun running and sponsorship of government coups worldwide (4). And yet, their activities gained the support and recognition of the Reagan-Bush White House. In one such instance, Ronald Reagan gave a speech to the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, reported to be one of the most influential NAZI collaborating groups within the WACL.  On July 13, 1983, Reagan inspired the ABN by telling them: “Your dream is our dream. Your hope is our hope.” (5). Just what dreams and hopes Reagan shared with this fascist NAZI group is unclear, unless the reader remembers Reagan's visit to Bitburg to "honor" fallen WWII SS officers. It should also be noted that some of the more prominent members of the WACL, such as retired US Major General Singlaub, were to be found in the Iran-Contra operation that ran guns, smuggled drugs to the US and overthrew governments as well (6).

Shortly after Levine’s arrest of Jose Gasser, the United States Attorney for Southern Miami released the drug suspect  before a Grand Jury was even established to hear the case. The US attorney involved in releasing Gasser, is Michael Sullivan. He was the same States Attorney who later tried the Noreiga case under Bush and Reagan (7).  In 1980, a “Cocaine Coup” occurred in Bolivia with the assistance of Gasser's family, World War II NAZI fugitive turned drug smuggler Klaus Barbie, (known as the WW2 "butcher of Lyons" in France) and several other prominent drug lords. Bolivia was now run by a drug cartel and began to dump more cocaine on American shores (8). Levine claims the US freed Gasser due to the CIA and White House support of those who  sponsored the coup, which occurred  not long  after Gasser was released. 

The B-rated acting president and his co-star, Bush, assisted in directing this B-rated scenario. 

It was not the White House alone that tolerated this change of government in Bolivia, but also a friend of the elder Bush who later put the former President  on his payroll. His name is Rev. Moon, the self proclaimed Second Coming of Christ, and leader of the Unification Church. 

It was a representative of the Rev. Moon’s Unification Church who was one of the first to congratulate this newly installed goon government in Bolivia. Further, Rev. Moon was a frequent guest and supporter of that brutal and sadistic narco-terrorist government (9).  Moon set out to  develop a relationship with a junta in Bolivia that was merely  a criminal front which used gang rape and torture against prisoners and opponents, and lined its pockets with drug laundered money. 

Rev. Moon is said to also be a sponsor of the WACL (10).

It has further been reported that Rev Moon donated anywhere up to millions of dollars to the Elder Bush and that the former president has made numerous for-hire speeches on Moon’s behalf, once he left office (11). One such speech occurred in 1996 in Buenos Aries, Argentina. The Unification Church was under fire by the South American press for supporting the "cocaine coup" in Bolivia as well as the Right Wing "Death Squads" governments of the 1970's  (12).  Nonetheless, Bush lobbied the Argentinean president to allow Moon to establish a newspaper in that country, citing Moon's Washington Times as an example of a great independent arm of the media. In fact, the Washington Times has doggedly defended Reagan and both Bush presidents, including publishing ongoing reports during the Iran-Contra scandal that the investigation was a waste of time (13). Moon also supported Dubbya in the Presidential election, criticized Gore in Washington Times editorials, and contributed money to Dubbya's campaign. 

Despite Moon's predilection towards Right Wing "Death Squads" and drug cartels (or perhaps because of it), his association with the political life of the Bush family still continues   During the George W. Bush inauguration, Moon donated all-expense junkets to the event for several prominent Christian ministers from Detroit. At least one attendee, the civic leader and Baptist minister Eddie Edwards, said he was unaware that Moon's Unification Church footed their bill to attend the Bush inaugural (14). Moon also sponsored the Inaugural Prayer Luncheon for Unity and Renewal on Jan. 19, 2001—which caused shock and dismay to many Baptists who attended the event (15). Why this came as a surprise should be no surprise at all, since many evangelical Christians support the conservative opinions expressed in Moons’ paper, The Washington Times.  

Rev Moon's  donations in the tens of millions to the dictator of the "rogue nation" of North Korea, Kim Joni II (16), in the early 90’s, has not dampened the relationship between him and the Bush family, even though Dubbya cites North Korea as one of three countries that harbors terrorists. Whether or not this is one of the terrorist countries that collects money from drug laundering, that Dubbya's ad campaign is alluding to, is unclear. 

Although Moon has has been reported to  display an  open contempt for the US and the individuality it breeds, (which is, interestingly enough,  a sticking point to some terrorist groups as well), the Elder Bush saw Rev. Moon as a man with vision whom he salutes.  (17).  Moon also stands a good chance in collecting funds from the US government, centered on Dubbya's "faith based" programs initiative. 

Apparently, the Bush family never met a payout they  didn’t like. 

Next Installment: A Little Closer to Home.                                                     

1. DONNA J. WARREN AND BERLIN A M .DOSS v. Central Intelligence Agency, United States      Department of Justice, et al.                               Case No.99-02603. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. DECLARATORY RELIEF DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL.

2. CIA-Contra-Crack-Controversy. "Allegation that the Return of the Seized Money to Zavala Was Caused by Intervention from the CIA. Part E: OIG Conclusions Regarding the Return of the Money".  Department Of Justice. Office of Inspector General. 

3.    DeRienzo, Paul. “Interview with Michael Levine: Causes And Cures”. Marble Collegiate Church. New York, New York. 11/09/1991

4.    Andersen, Scott and Andersen, Jon Lee. “Inside the League.”  Dodd-Mead. 1986

5.    Ibid.

6.    DeRienzo, Paul. “Interview with Michael Levine: Causes And Cures”. Marble Collegiate Church. New York, New York. 11/09/1991

7.    Meldon, Jerry. “Return of Bolivia's Drug-Stained Dictator.” Consortium 1997

8.    Parry, Robert. “Dark Side of Rev. Moon: Drug Allies.” Consortium 1997.

8.    Ibid.

9.    Ibid.  

10.    Andersen, Scott and Andersen, Jon Lee. “Inside the League.”  Dodd-Mead. 1986 

11. Parry, Robert. "The Bush-Kim-Moon Triangle of Money."  Re-issued in Common Dreams News Center. 02/08/92

12. Ibid.

13.    Crumm, David and Capulet, Alexa. “Ministers upset by Moon visit: Baptist leaders say they don't endorse talk.” Detroit Free Press 03/13/01                                                  

 14.”SBC leaders saw a new Moon rising at luncheon”. Baptist Standard. 01/29/01

     15. Parry, Robert “Rev. Moon, North Korea and       .     the Bushes”  Consortium Magazine 10/11/01

16.  Parry, Robert. “Dark Side of Rev. Moon:  Hooking George Bush” Consortium. 1997    

17.  Bush Praises Moon as "Man of Vision." Reuters.

                    PLEASE DISTRIBUTE  

                            
RadioRote® allows distribution of information from its site, as long as RadioRote® is cited or given credit.   You may not use the RadioRote® logo, or alter it, unless citing it as a source.  ©2001
For problems or questions regarding this website contact radiorote.
Last updated: March 22, 2002