|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
 Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 2:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Have you, done the research |
You want me to read a link beginning with "Some or all of this article's listed sources may not be reliable." and "The neutrality of this article is disputed."?
Look man, the U.S. government is not pushing drugs as part of some secret conspiracy. Have there been corrupt people within governments (all throughout human history)? Yes, of course. But overall, the U.S. wants to reduce the amount of (and access to) hard drugs on the street. That's what the voting public wants as well.
Good God, Leon, you sound like visitorq, guavashake, wishfulthinkng, and radcon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Have you, done the research |
You want me to read a link beginning with "Some or all of this article's listed sources may not be reliable." and "The neutrality of this article is disputed."?
Look man, the U.S. government is not pushing drugs as part of some secret conspiracy. Have there been corrupt people within governments (all throughout human history)? Yes, of course. But overall, the U.S. wants to reduce the amount of (and access to) hard drugs on the street. That's what the voting public wants as well.
Good God, Leon, you sound like visitorq, guavashake, wishfulthinkng, and radcon. |
Don't be silly. Why not read the report put out by the government itself.
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/north06.pdf
http://www.cfr.org/drug-trafficking-and-control/senate-subcommittee-report-drugs-law-enforcement-foreign-policy-kerry-committee-report/p28122 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joelove
Joined: 12 May 2011
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| Well if someone got 20 years, it is because they murdered somebody. |
What? You've said some good stuff in this thread, but I don't know what world you live in when naivete like this gets expressed. Primarily, it seems to me, your foremost interest is patriotic. You don't care if people are ruined. If a man is put away for his poverty and illness. Stop being an American for a minute. Be a human being. It may be that a black man goes to jail for 20 years for murder. It may be for his drug use. It may be for his selling of crack. It may be for other reasons. The policy was changed to suit political self-interest. Is that a mystery? I'm not being smug or self-satisfied to say these things. I just wonder why half the people in American prisons today, a million, are in prison for drug offenses. Explain that to me. It's not even my country, but I don't care about that. You apparently do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joelove wrote: |
| I just wonder why half the people in American prisons today, a million, are in prison for drug offenses. Explain that to me. |
Well, that number is factually inaccurate. The 50% figure is for federal prisoners, not prisoners as a whole. Federal prison inmates account for only a fraction of the total incarcerated population. At the state level 16% are in for drugs, while 53% are serving time for violent offenses. Overall, only one out of five prisoners in the United States are in jail because of drugs. It's not a million or anything close to that. It's one out of a thousand Americans. (99.9% of Americans are not in locked up for drugs. 0.1% are.)
Federal: On Dec. 31, 2012, there were 196,574 sentenced prisoners under federal jurisdiction. Of these, 99,426 were serving time for drug offenses, 11,688 for violent offenses, 11,568 for property offenses, and 72,519 for "public order" offenses (of which 23,700 were sentenced for immigration offenses, 30,046 for weapons offenses, and 17,633 for "other").
State: On Dec. 31, 2011, there were 1,341,797 sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction. Of these, 222,738 were serving time for drug offenses, of whom 55,013 were merely convicted for possession. There were also 717,861 serving time for violent offenses, 249,574 for property offenses, 142,230 for "public order" offenses (which include weapons, drunk driving, court offenses, commercialized vice, morals and decency offenses, liquor law violations, and other public-order offenses), and 9,392 for "other/unspecified".
Someone could be put away for 20 years (and even then they would probably get out earlier than that if they behaved well in prison) for drugs if they were a major drug kingpin with a history of prior high level crimes. But for most- especially if it is their first offense- the sentence is light. If they have no prior criminal record, and they were arrested for drugs without simultaneous violence during the crime/arrest, they can not only avoid jail but get the charge and arrest wiped off their record if they stay out of trouble (don't get arrested again) for one year. At least that is true in the state where I'm from.
JoeLove, you have to keep in mind Canadians (where you are from) are obsessed with making the United States look bad. What you see, hear, and read in the Canadian media may not be the whole story. Situations are complex. I'm an American (meaning I know more about America than you do), but I still have so much more to learn. But I do think I am growing wiser (and more informed) with age. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Don't be silly. Why not read the report put out by the government itself. |
First of all, you are talking about something that happened thirty years ago in 1984. (It's old news/ancient history/hardly relevant to 2014.) Next, you are misinterpreting what happened/drawing false conclusions.
A series of expose articles in the San Jose Mercury-News by reporter Gary Webb told tales of a drug triangle during the 1980s that linked CIA officials in Central America, a San Francisco drug ring and a Los Angeles drug dealer. According to the stories, the CIA and its operatives used crack cocaine--sold via the Los Angeles African-American community--to raise millions to support the agency's clandestine operations in Central America.
The CIA's suspect past made the sensational articles an easy sell. Talk radio switchboards lit up, as did African-American leaders like U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, who pointed to Webb's articles as proof of a mastermind plot to destroy inner-city black America.
One of the people who was accused in the San Jose Mercury-News of being in the midst of the CIA cocaine conspiracy is one of the most respected, now retired, veteran D.E.A. agents, Robert "Bobby" Nieves.
"You have to understand Central America at that time was a haven for the conspiracy theorists. Christic Institute, people like Gary Webb, others down there, looking to dig up some story for political advantage," Nieves said. "No sexier story than to create the notion in people's minds that these people are drug traffickers."
But in the weeks following publication, Webb's peers doubted the merit of the articles. Fellow journalists at the Washington Post, New York Times and Webb's own editor accused him of blowing a few truths up into a massive conspiracy.
Amongst Webb's fundamental problems was his implication that the CIA lit the crack cocaine fuse. It was conspiracy theory: a neat presentation of reality that simply didn't jibe with real life. Webb later agreed in an interview that there is no hard evidence that the CIA as an institution or any of its agent-employees carried out or profited from drug trafficking.
Still, the fantastic story of the CIA injecting crack into ghettos had taken hold. In response to the public outcry following Webb's allegations--which were ultimately published in book form under the title Dark Alliance--the CIA conducted an internal investigation of its role in Central America related to the drug trade. Frederick Hitz, as the CIA Inspector General-- an independent watchdog approved by Congress--conducted the investigation. In October 1998, the CIA released a declassified version of Hitz's two-volume report.
The IG's report cleared the CIA of complicity with the inner-city crack cocaine trade. It refuted charges that CIA officials knew that their Nicaraguan allies were dealing drugs.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/special/cia.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Don't be silly. Why not read the report put out by the government itself. |
First of all, you are talking about something that happened thirty years ago in 1984. (It's old news/ancient history/hardly relevant to 2014.) Next, you are misinterpreting what happened/drawing false conclusions. |
You are the one who brought up the crack epidemic and how much the government cared about it. I give you government documents, and you post PBS stories? Anyways- more research for you.
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm
Please note- Ollie North never got punished, and is still considered a respected figure. I'm not talking about the Webb story, or the idea that it was a government conspiracy to flood cities with Crack. What I'm talking about is out and the open, as documented in the government reports I linked to. It was however a government conspiracy to sell weapons to Iran and funnel money to the Contras, and to facilitate the Contras drug trade into America because drugs in inner city America wasn't as high a priority as funding right wing thugs in Central America. Also, the C.I.A.'s own report cleared it, really, how convenient. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
It wasn't the CIA's own report that cleared them; it was an independent watchdog appointed by congress.
Ollie North was punished.
North was tried in 1988. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts, and, on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and ordering the destruction of documents via his secretary, Fawn Hall. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years' probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service. Oliver North performed some of his community service within Potomac Gardens, a public housing project in Southeast Washington, D.C.[17]
However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[18] North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.[19]
In '94, he tried to run for senate but lost. (Why? Because of public opinion.)
What do those links say, specifically? That the U.S. did not do enough to stop drugs during that time (not the same as being dealers themselves)? That they were loosely linked to drug runners (much like Obama was linked to Jeremiah Wright)? What is your point exactly? From reading those links it looks like the U.S. was policing itself (and doing a damn good job at it). That's the opposite of corruption. It's truth, justice, and transparency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
It wasn't the CIA's own report that cleared them; it was an independent watchdog appointed by congress.
Ollie North was punished.
North was tried in 1988. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts, and, on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and ordering the destruction of documents via his secretary, Fawn Hall. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years' probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service. Oliver North performed some of his community service within Potomac Gardens, a public housing project in Southeast Washington, D.C.[17]
However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[18] North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.[19]
In '94, he tried to run for senate but lost. (Why? Because of public opinion.)
What do those links say, specifically? (I can't open the PDF.) That the U.S. did not do enough to stop drugs during that time (not the same as being dealers themselves)? That they were loosely linked to drug runners (much like Obama was linked to Jeremiah Wright)? What is your point exactly? |
You can't open PDFs? I'm not going to detail all of them, but they show a clear complicity, as does John Kerry's investigation. The Contras were majorly involved in drugs, the C.I.A. was majorly involved with the Contras, as well as Manuel Noriega. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
How about articulating the specific actions the CIA did relating to drugs? Some people (supposedly) had knowledge of drug running going on in South America, but looked the other way? What exactly was it they did? Was it all of the CIA or just some people? Was it an official government policy?
By the way, The U.S. couldn't have liked Noriega that much.
In the 1989 invasion of Panama by the United States he was removed from power, captured, detained as a prisoner of war, and flown to the United States. Noriega was tried on eight counts of drug trafficking, racketeering, and money laundering in April 1992.
The U.S. took him out of power a long time ago, and he has been in jail ever since. (Up until 2007, he was locked up in the U.S.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Squire
Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2014 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The UK seems to have opposite problem where criminals (real criminals, not just drug users) don't get punished harshly enough. I'm far from an expert but the news constantly has stories of shockingly inadequate sentences for stuff like murder/manslaughter, and particularly in the case of women who commit those sorts of crimes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wishfullthinkng
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Have you, done the research |
You want me to read a link beginning with "Some or all of this article's listed sources may not be reliable." and "The neutrality of this article is disputed."?
Look man, the U.S. government is not pushing drugs as part of some secret conspiracy. Have there been corrupt people within governments (all throughout human history)? Yes, of course. But overall, the U.S. wants to reduce the amount of (and access to) hard drugs on the street. That's what the voting public wants as well.
Good God, Leon, you sound like visitorq, guavashake, wishfulthinkng, and radcon. |
lol. lump me in with the people who continually own you on most of your threads weird rambler, i'm okay with that.
sometimes i wonder if you actually read the replies on your threads. you get proven wrong so many times in almost every single thread and your logic holes in your ridiculous statements are shown time and time again, yet you soldier on. it's quite pathetic really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joelove
Joined: 12 May 2011
|
| Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
JoeLove, you have to keep in mind Canadians (where you are from) are obsessed with making the United States look bad. What you see, hear, and read in the Canadian media may not be the whole story. Situations are complex. I'm an American (meaning I know more about America than you do), but I still have so much more to learn. But I do think I am growing wiser (and more informed) with age. |
That's fine. And I'm interested in the dialogue and not in nationality. I'm not really all that attached to being a Canadian, psychologically. Or maybe I am and don't know it. I lived in Asia for 15 years, well over half my adult life. I'm a Newfoundlander. We think we're special too. When it comes down to it of course we are just people, and this nationality stuff is silly. We recognize this, and try as we might, it is there. For most of us it's taken for granted. And most of us rarely consider how deeply we are invested emotionally to the background. It is a real thing to us. The wars and killings attest to that.
So, we have a particular issue here, but it also implies many greater issues, if we can call them that. To look at these things with any clarity at all you cannot be an American, and I cannot be a Canadian. These are human problems. Fundamentally, our problems are global. We need to begin with that, for that is true no matter the issue. Though of course there may be governmental or legal things that lie within the boundaries of regions.
What matters is the treatment of others. Do we feel compassion? In our heart, do we care? Because if we do not, there is nothing to us.
In your thinking, as well as in mine, you need some awareness that there is no difference between the way you see things and what you are. Again, fundamentally, throughout your entire psychology. If you don't feel this deeply, you will not really be aware of anything. It is always about you. It is always about me. The suffering of others is not really different than yours, because all people suffer. Do we understand this? I'm not sure I do. Sometimes maybe. Others might call this nonsense, but don't you suppose perhaps that deep down people the world over are the same with their inner conditioning, their sorrow, their want for pleasure, their fears, and all the rest? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The whole thing is circular. People in the USA are angry, and rightly so, angry people commit violence and/or do drugs to escape. The society locks them up, they get angrier, repeat.
Start treating people with respect and they become respectable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
