Justice Minister Antonis Roupakiotis, his DIMAR party and especially PASOK are using a very anti-Hellenic anti racist bill to provide a new criminal tackling against racism and xenophobia. Indeed the phenomenon of racism and xenophobia has to be tackled, but this bill is scandalous, and it should not be tabled in Parliament.
The bill provides punishments such as jail time from three months to six years, a fine of 20.000 euros and finally, removal of political rights for all those that don't endorse the "anti racist" State directives. Specifically, those are the punishments that will be faced by "whomever publicly, orally or through the Press or the Internet or any other means cause or stimulate violence against a team or a person based on race, religion, heritage and sexual orientation". This is all well and good, but the new draft law also denies the importance of genocidal crimes, or crimes against humanity, war criminals and the crimes of Nazism and Fascism.
Nazism and Fascism we agree, but genocidal crimes (such as the death of over 300,000 Greeks in Asia Minor)?
Are they crazy?
And PASOK and DIMAR are actually endorsing this.
From what we read, and from what has already been confessed, the bill was not drafted in Greece, it was actually a translation of a foreign document. (From which centers... those that belong to George Soros?)
Basically the bill follows the standard of similar laws in European states, like Germany, and the need to pass this bill is dictated by the panic the phenomenal rise of the Golden Dawn party has caused to all these globalist left wing servants and their masters.
Obviously genocidal crimes cannot be erased from history because they offend specific minorities, so it is going to be interesting to see how the conservatives will tackle this with their Leftist coalition partners.The public is going to be totally outraged!
At the same time this bill violates the Greek Constitution and the right of all the citizens to partake in the social and political life of the country (article 5, section 1), the right to free expression of ideas and the prohibition of Press censorship (article 14, section 1 and 2) as well as the freedom of religious consciousness (article 13, section 1), from the moment it demands to forbid expression against other dogmas, a basic element of the freedom of speech.
The law predicts that if a MP expresses his opinion in the Greek Parliament, which can be characterized as being too "racist and xenophobic" then he will lose his immunity.
That is indeed hysterical.
When MPs express their opinion their immunity is lifted, but when they rob the country of billions of Euros, receive kickbacks and launder money, then that is ok. Their immunity stays intact.
Question: Would the international community erase or ignore, or even dare to deny that the Jewish Holocaust ever happened because it would offend Germany?
Obviously not!
So then why the hell would PASOK and DIMAR endorse this scandalous draft bill which clearly needs to be rewritten in accordance to Greek standards.
Two words - Corrupt politics
The New Democracy party wants to sack the Ragoussis law, which was a campaign promise. The law basically legalizes hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in Greece. and is a scandalous product of the George Papandreou government which always endorsed a "New World Order" and obviously worked hard to please foreign centers and/or personalities such as Mr. George Soros.
PASOK and DIMAR who are basically paddling for life and who are not expected to even score 3 percent at the next parliamentary elections are indirectly pressing the government to ratify the scandalous anti racist law and by doing so they will support the government in sacking the Ragoussis law. From what we hear on the news, both these Leftist parties do not even want to compromise the issue at all. In fact they believe that by pinning Antonis Samaras against the wall with this issue it will score them new voters in the long-term. In other words with the Ragoussis law they will automatically gain votes from the various newly legalized minorities, and from the antiracist law, the "shady" centers in Thrace and in some minority centers in Athens will be grateful for their newfound rights and once they are legalized they will vote for them as well.
Folks, it is perfectly clear that all those foreign centers that worked hard over the past few decades to strike at our religion, our language, our culture and our family have declared an all out war against the Greek People.
What saddens us here at HellasFrappe is that the New Democracy party is falling into a leftist trap again. They are allowing the Left to dictate all the political developments in the country. This alone should sound an alarm to conservatives to ban together against the Left and these scandalous progressive ideals.
Indeed a racism law is needed, but it cannot only support minorities.
Seriously, will they jail all those who deny the genocides in Smyrna and Pontus?
We wonder, will they jail all those who entered this country illegally and have the audacity to stand in the middle of Athens and yell "death to the infidels" in the name of Allah?
Do our politicians believe that this will be accepted by the Greek people?
Are they crazy??????????
The only thing that they will accomplish is to bring the Golden Dawn party in power with this law. So Nazism and Fascism will finally win. (Good work you morons!)
If Greece's political elite wants to tackle the phenomenon Golden Dawn, then it should stop attacking this party, or pushing it to a corner. More than one million people support this party and this should be respected. All voices should be welcomed in Parliament because Greece is the cornerstone of democracy. And for heaven's sake, there are somethings that cannot be compromised by Greeks, the main thing of which is our pride. Denying the atrocities in Asia Minor because it is a "progressive" thing to do is hogwash, and any political party that supports this should be banned from the Greek Parliament!
Our opinion here at HellasFrappe is that this law should be scrapped because it does not respect and/or value Greek history, and then returned to Parliament to be ratified in accordance with the Greek Constitution and Greek standards. The Ragoussis law, on the other, should have already been shredded to bits.
The 20-year-old Dutchman who has been accused of violently stabbing an 11-year-old Russian boy who was staying at a hotel on the island of Crete last week has remanded in custody and ordered to undergo psychiatric examination.
The accused, Cirino Schrijver, (whose mother is Greek) faced a magistrate in Herakleio on Monday but during the 15-minute session his court-appointed lawyer apparently stated that it was not possible for his client to answer any more questions.
The lawyer noted that Schrijver is suffering from serious medical problems and had stopped taking his medication while he was employed in Crete.
It should be reminded that the accused stabbed the young boy 20 times last week after stealing his laptop and mobile phone. Schrijver had been hired at the hotel in Hersonissos where the poor victim was staying just a few days before his attack.
The 20-year-old’s mother, who says her son is autistic, and his sister are also in Crete. They have apparently submitted his medical file to authorities on the island but because it is in the Dutch language the documents have to be officially translated.
Reports said that Schrijver’s mother told authorities that the hotel he was working at was unaware that he required medical assistance.
In Athens, the 11-year-old victim is slowly recovering. Reports say that doctors have began physiotherapy work on him and he is scheduled to undergo another operation on Tuesday to repair a damaged tendon in one of his arms.
Launched on May 8, the new party, Greek Democratic 5 Star Movement or Drachma 5, calls on Greece to dump the euro, return to its former currency, the drachma, and implement banking reform based on the separation of commercial and investment banking as modeled on the Glass-Steagall Act.
Contributed to HellasFrappe By E.I.R. Strategic Alert www.eir.de
The key initiator of the movement is Theodoros Katsanevas, a Professor of Labor Economics who was among the featured speakers of the Schiller Institute’s international conference, “The Last Chance for Humanity” held last April 13-14 in Germany. Prof. Katsanevas also signed the Resolution: “Either Glass-Steagall, or Chaos and Genocide” issued at the end of that conference (cf. SAS 17/13). He is not new to politics, having been a founding member of the Pan Hellenic Socialist Party for which he served several terms in parliament, as well as serving in government.
While similar to the name of the Italian “Five Star Movement” of populist Beppe Grillo, the five stars in the Greek party stand for the basic positions of the party:
1) overthrow of the Memorandum of the IMF, European Commission and ECB;
2) return to the drachma;
3) facilitating robust growth;
4) restoring national dignity
5) ensuring social justice.
Its 25 member organizing committee includes no comedians, but they do represent a cross-section of the Greek population with teachers, businessmen, engineers, economists, university professors, etc. Their program clearly recognizes that the “Memorandum and the euro are an absolutely indisputable unity”, therefore a withdrawal from the Eurozone is needed as well as implementation of “a comprehensive plan,” including cancelling 70% of the Greek debt.
After denouncing “casino-capitalism” and the “‘holy alliance’ of globalized economy of gambling that erodes the real economy of human labor”, the party manifesto calls for bank separation:
“Control of the banking system, capital flows and speculative financial transactions, separation between commercial and investment banks...”
Under the principle of “patriotic socialism with a human face with social solidarity,” the manifesto promotes development of the industrial and agricultural potential of the Greek economy through investment in technological innovations and expansion and development of its infrastructure, and the creation of “international university training centers and research institutes to utilize Greek scientists who excel internationally,” and are now emigrating by the thousands.
The manifesto calls for establishing an alliance among Italy, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus and Greece to exit the euro and enter into a cooperative economic and political alliance.
In his recent testimony before Congress, US Attorney General Eric Holder, the so-called highest law-enforcement officer in the land, responded to questions about the AP scandal. Holder’s Justice Dept. had secretly subpoenaed and seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters.
Holder stated he didn’t know anything about anything, because he had recused himself from the issue and recused himself from the new internal DOJ investigation of the matter.
What?
Huh?
His own agency, the US Dept. of Justice, had spied secretly on reporters. But he, Holder, the head of that agency, decided to remain entirely ignorant about the whole fiasco, once he discovered the vague outline of what was going on.
This is like the manager of a car agency learning that 50 new cars in his lot have packets of heroin in their glove compartments, and immediately withdrawing to Bermuda for a fishing vacation.
The Congressional committee then asked Holder about the new internal DOJ investigation of itself vis-a-vis the AP scandal. Holder said he wasn’t absolutely sure about that either, because, again, he had recused himself.
This is like that car-agency manager sitting in his boat in Bermuda and putting a blindfold over his eyes and plugs in his ears.
Why did Holder recuse himself? Unasked, unanswered. That in itself is staggering.
Possibly, he recused himself because he might be a target of the ensuing investigation into the scandal. In other words, he needed to avoid the appearance of being in charge of his own agency, from which position he could, theoretically, let himself off the hook?!?!
In that case, his power is decimated. He’s a sitting duck. He’s nobody.
Some unit of the Justice Department is tasked with figuring out how and why the DOJ spied on reporters—and who is to say that unit is automatically free from political influence and corruption? Who is to say that unit will do an honest job and indict employees of the DOJ?
In other words, it’s a no-win situation. Doesn’t matter who, at the Dept. of Justice, does or doesn’t recuse himself. Holder could have kept his head in the game and pushed the internal investigation himself. But he didn’t.
He’s the village idiot. He doesn’t know anything about anything.
The press doesn’t gang up and attack him hard.
“Listen, Mr. Holder. We’re not buying your recusal or your ignorance. You’re the man in charge. You’re the boss. If you don’t know what’s going on, what good are you?”
“Mr. Holder, when exactly did you okay the secret seizing of AP reporters’ phone records? We know you did. When was it?”
“What? You never did okay the spying and seizing, Mr. Holder? You mean you, the boss, didn’t know what was happening on your watch? Your people feel no need to get your approval for a major op like this?”
“We’re camping out on your doorstep until we get some real answers.”
NONE of this has happened. The press has whined and complained, and that’s about it.
“I don’t know who put all those packets of heroin in the new cars, and I don’t want to know. Maybe somebody thinks I OKed it, and they’ll investigate me. So it’s my duty to remain as ignorant as I can about the whole thing, to preserve neutrality and integrity…”
Holder is saying that any knowledge he might have, but doesn’t, about the original plan to spy on reporters, about the actual spying, about the aftermath of the spying, and about the new internal investigation into the spying…any knowledge on these subjects could make him INFORMED, and therefore, better able to lie now to investigators, if he were so disposed, which of course he isn’t.
Right? Got it? Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? Irrefutable logic. No problem. Let’s all take a nap.
The Matrix Revealed
Imagine if this happened. A few months after 9/11, the director of the CIA appears before 9/11 Commission and states the following:
“Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve intentionally kept myself entirely ignorant about what the Agency knew leading up to 9/11, what the Agency found out on the day of 9/11, and what the Agency has learned since 9/11. I exist in a pristine state about all these matters, because if you investigate me for malfeasance, I want to be able to say, unequivocally, that I haven’t been tainted by actual knowledge, which I could then twist to my own advantage. And I haven’t covered myself with lies, because I have no idea what the truth is. I trust you understand this. I trust you understand the sacrifice I’ve made in order to help you arrive at the truth. It has not been easy watching sports 24/7 and keeping myself from the news of the day. I have suffered. But I do it because I’m a patriot. You’re welcome.”
Holder actually believes we’re buying his act?
Well, I hate to say this, but he does. He thinks he can get over. He thinks he can slither through and around and over the press.
And he’s probably right, judging by what the press has and hasn’t done so far.
The man is a towering liar and fabricator. He’s all lies all the way up and down.
Can’t the committee before whom he’s testifying at least fall down laughing, because they’re seeing a man like them working his act?
“Wow, Eric, I thought I’d been witness to some major bullshit in my time, but you’re in another league. I’ve told some tall tales, but this, this pose of see no evil, it’s championship material. Really. You’ve taken me to school. I’m awed. Where do I sign up? I need what you’ve got. I really do. You’re pushing Bill Clinton for the heavyweight belt.”
Holder: “I can’t comment on that comment or anything else. I’m merely saying I have no knowledge or understanding of anything, and I’ve achieved this state of mind on purpose. Therefore, I’m clean. I’m a machine carefully built to specs of ignorance, a machine with no function. In that sense, I’m perfect.”
We may be seeing the greatest bureaucratic ploy in the history of the democracy.
Imagine a million bureaucrats like him. Each one defers to the other, who in turn expresses the same across-the-board Zero. At the end of it, the apparatus spits out a blank piece of paper and everybody goes home.
Yes, government is wonderful. It’s cosmically zen. It’s what we all want.
Life without life.
To top it off, Obama, at his press conference yesterday, said he has full confidence in Holder. Meaning: Obama is sure Holder will remain a blank slate.
“I have full confidence that the man who is running the Department of Justice isn’t running it. He’s staring at the wall. That’s what I want him to do.”
Exit From the Matrix
Recusal, the actual version, works like this. A lawyer who once represented a client suing a chemical company for damage is now an appeals judge. Another case involving the same company comes up for review. The judge backs out. He says, “I once went up against the company in court, so I won’t get involved now.”
What Holder is doing is from another planet. He’s found a way to take the Fifth without admitting he has anything to incriminate himself about.
“Mr. Jones, were you at the restaurant on the night of the murder?”
“I recuse myself from answering that question.”
“What?”
“I don’t want to give the impression that I have any knowledge about the murder.”
“But you’re on trial for the murder, sir.”
“Yes, and that in itself is prejudicial. Do you see? Aspersions about my character and actions have been cast. I wish to remove myself from the possibility of such accusations.”
“You can’t. That’s why you’re here. We suspect you of committing murder.”
“I recuse myself.”
“Are you invoking your Fifth Amendment rights?”
“Absolutely not. That would imply I have some knowledge about the crime. I reject that characterization.”
“You Honor, the witness is unresponsive. Please instruct him to answer my original question.”
“As a judge, I find the defendant’s posture of recusal interesting. I think we’ll let him go with a warning and a small fine. Three hours of community service in the White House, for which he’ll earn seven thousand dollars an hour. Court is adjourned.”
Jon Rappoport
The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
RIA-Novosti Infographics - During the reign of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon Minin launched new studies of Russian sacred texts, comparing them with Greek models to identify discrepancies. The reform started with the convening of a Sobor in Moscow in 1654, which decided to bring the liturgical books in line with Greek manuscripts.
The Great Moscow Sobor of 1666-67 approved new rites of worship and ranks.
The authorities began a crackdown against the opponents of reform, which lasted for about two centuries. The Old Ritualists split at various times, the monarchy varied in its approach to them. At times, the government was lenient; at others, it was severe.
Sometimes, the Belokrinitsky Old Ritualist hierarchy could serve legally at the Rogozhskoe Cemetery in Moscow, but at other periods, during the so-called “sealing of the altars”, the state forbade the Old Ritualists to serve the liturgy.
In 1800, some of the “priested” Old Ritualists sought rapprochement with the Holy Governing Synod, which established a special structure for the so-called Yedinoverie (“One-Faithers”, “Unionists”)… maintaining the pre-reform ritual, they submitted to the jurisdiction of the canonical Church, recognising that ritual differences don’t affect general dogmatic teaching.
For example, in comparing the sign of the cross, although they used different constructions, both usages symbolise the unity of the three persons of the Holy Trinity and of Christ‘s dual divine-human nature. In 1905, Tsar St Nikolai Aleksandrovich issued a decree on religious tolerance, removing all civil restrictions on the rights of the Old Ritualists, and, in 1971, an MP Sobor adopted a resolution to lift the oaths and anathemas from the old rites.
The following article first appeared in Cyprus Mail, on May 3rd, 2013.
For the past one and a half year natural gas has occupied centre stage in the local media. Strikingly enough, energy developments in the Eastern Med have garnered sustained international attention. To put things into context, if the Aphrodite gas field, is appraised to say 225 billion cubic metres (bcm) or 8 tcf it will surpass the UK’s proved natural gas reserves of 7.1 tcf (201 bcm). Without factoring in any future natural gas discoveries, block 12 alone has enough gas to supply the Cypriot energy needs for several decades to come still leaving an appreciable leeway for exports. But while virtually all the limelight focuses on natural gas as a way to prod Cyprus out of the economic crisis, it is easy to lose sight of the prospect for oil.
Oil and natural gas despite naturally occurring together usually in the same geological formations, serve two distinct energy markets. Natural gas is predominantly destined for electricity generation whereas oil is the prime transportation fuel. Worldwide, oil makes up about 30% of the primary energy supply. Transportation fuels including diesel, gasoline and aviation fuel (kerosene) are 96% derived from oil. Oil by virtue of its ease of being hauled, chemical stability, high energy density, and safe nature dominates the transportation energy mix. This hegemony is unlikely to be challenged any time soon, unless alternative and cost-effective transportation fuels emerge or hybrid/electric vehicles become more economically competitive circumventing technical limitations. Natural gas is more environmentally friendly than oil. Mainly due to its gaseous nature and relatively low volumetric energy density, natural gas is less fungible than oil meaning that it is cumbersome to transport from source to end-users.
Deepwater offshore oil production is expected to undergo phenomenal growth accounting for 11% of the global oil production in 2015, up from 1% in 2000. In relation to natural gas, oil does not only fetch a higher price it is usually exploited within shorter time frames. On an energy equivalent basis meaning that a barrel of oil contains 5.8 times the energy of natural gas and at a natural gas selling price of $10 per million BTU, oil is worth three times as much as the price of natural gas.
Prospecting for oil
Expedited by the presidential elections, the second licensing round culminated in the award of five offshore licences, namely, blocks 2, 3 and 9 to Eni SpA and Kogas and blocks 10 and 11 to Total SA. Disclosed sources revealed that Total SA will prioritise the quest for oil in blocks 10 and 11. For this purpose, the French supermajor is believed to be making the necessary preparations for oil exploration. These steps comprise gathering all the pertinent geological information and analysing it in the context of the already two-dimensional seismic data, conducted by PGS, and the interpretation reports issued by Beicip Franlab. Subsequently, a seismic survey vessel will acquire three-dimensional (3D) seismic measurements in the promising acreage.
Next in line will be to source the semi-submersible drilling rig or drill ship which will attempt the exploration well(s). Each well is expected to cost about €80m. As of February 2013, the average chartering rates for drill-ships amounted to $450,000/day while semi-sub rigs cost about $370,000/day. Oil is usually found in reservoirs found at greater depths than natural gas. Only in-situ drilling can unravel the mystery of the existence of oil in the Cypriot EEZ. Interestingly, no well—in the Eastern Med— has yet to reach the desirable depth at which oil is believed to reside. If successful, such an oil borehole is anticipated to extent to a total depth, including the water column, of about 7,500m. Indeed this will be an engineering feat. Developing such a deep offshore oil field will represent another engineering marvel. Such ultra deepwater developments were literally unheard of a decade ago.
Prior to embarking on such an ambitious endeavour oil companies piece together all the geological evidence within reach. Considering the Southern area of the Cypriot EEZ we have strong indications to be optimistic that oil lies below the sea floor. Suffice to mention that Beicip Franlab in its interpretation reports of the seismic data, acquired by PGS, identifies 14 oil plays, 6 of which are located in the vicinity of the Eratosthenes sea mount close to blocks number 10 and 11. Proved working hydrocarbon systems offer another line of evidence. Last but not least the natural gas discovered in the Aphrodite field is thermogenic in nature pointing to the presence of oil.
Timeframe for exports: natural gas versus oil
Given the state of the Cypriot economy, time is of the essence. Put simply, the faster Cyprus exploits a portion of its fossil fuels the better—provided that benefits spill into the economy. However, this pace is governed by a host of factors chief among which are technical and economic considerations. The Tamar gas consortium prides itself of developing the gas field within a record time schedule spanning just four years from discovery to commercialisation. Essentially, the time it takes to extract natural gas or oil from a subsea reservoir of cognate geological complexity requiring similar equipment does not fundamentally differ, or at least the first phases of the field life cycle (see figure). That is, for oil companies to gain access and complete the exploratory drilling it usually takes 3 to 4 years. Once hydrocarbons have been encountered the next phase is to appraise them. The appraisal phase, which accurately assesses the potential of the oil or gas field and hedges against risk, takes about 2 years.
Subsequently, the development phase could extend from 2 to 4 years depending on the complexity of the hydrocarbons field, extraction rates, availability of equipment, etc. Field production of oil or gas usually lasts about 20 to 30 years. Finally, offshore field decommissioning and abandonment could take 2 to 3 years. When it comes to exporting oil or natural gas what matters most is the time it takes to construct the export terminal. Stranded gas resources with no immediate access to markets can be exported in liquefied form usually requiring a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility and a subsea pipeline to siphon the gas to shore.
Offshore oil on the other hand has the advantage that it can be processed in-situ onboard a Floating, Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel. As it name implies, an FPSO partially processed the oil, stores it onboard and offloads it onto a shuttle tanker. Hence, the FPSO solution obviates the need to construct expensive submarine pipelines. Compared to the construction of an LNG plant of about 5 million tonnes of export capacity per year (5 mtpa), which could take about 8 years to complete and cost about €7 billion, an FPSO costs around €1bn and can be ready in, say, 2.5 years. Overall, natural gas exports can commence the earliest after 2022 while oil exports as early as 2021.
Prior to any exploitation, however, the prerequisite is the discovery of oil. Despite significant advances in 3D seismic techniques encountering extractable volumes of hydrocarbons remains a risky business. The chances of striking oil in the Cypriot EEZ are probably on the order of 40% i.e. 4 out of 10 wells. However, as of 2010, the world average success rate for commercial discoveries represented dropped to 18%.
Indisputably oil can be a game changer if discovered in sufficiently large quantities for commercial exploitation. If additional gas quantities are discovered, Europe stands to benefit from Cypriot exports as well. Hypothetically if oil is found, it will mark a new era for Cyprus and the region. Until then maintaining sovereignty over our resources is of paramount importance.
By Constantinos Hadjistassou*, PhD is a researcher at the University of Cyprus specialising on hydrocarbons and low-carbon energy technologies. Visit his website: www.energysequel.com
The numbers of arrivals and transit passage of tourists at the Piraeus Port have increased by a whopping 24,69% in the first quarter of 2013, and according to officials this is just the beginning! Piraeus Port is finally moving forward and with two new passenger stations by the end of the year, Greece's major port is finally moving forward. According to data presented by Piraeus Port Organisation Chief, George Anomeritis, on May 15, the number of home porting passengers rose by 22.05% compared to the first quarter of 2012, reaching 8,120 passengers, while transit passengers have increased by 24,94%, amounting to a total of 88,948. Anomeritis also announced that by the end of the year, Pireaus passengers served by three stations: the second, 60,800 square feet station will be inaugurated on May 27, while a third station measuring 37,680 square feet are going to be ready by the end of 2013.
Christof Lehmann (nsnbc),- On 19 May Turks traditionally celebrate Turkey´s independence and the father of modern Turkey, Kemal Ataturk. Today and yesterday Turks protested against the AKP´s and the Erdogan government´s illegal war on Syria and demanded that the government should resign. During protests in Reyhanh, where terror bombs killed dozens on 11 May, Poice attacked protesters with batons, water cannons and tear gas.
19 May 2013The protests were organized by several mass organizations, trade unions and political parties, including the Turkish Youth Union (TGB), the Association of Kemalist Thought (ADD), the Workers Party – Turkey and other organizations and parties.
Today´s demonstration marched toward the Mausoleum of Atatürk. The atmosphere is tense and there are reports about clashes between protesters and police forces.
Also yesterday, on 18 May there were mass protests in Turkey. The protest yesterday took place in Hatay and was organized by the Turkish – Syrian Brotherhood Platform, which consists of the Workers Party – Turkey, the Turkish Youth Organization and other progressive and patriotic organizations and individuals.
The protest yesterday was a response to the bombings in Reyhanh on 11 May, in which dozens of people were killed. About ten thousand people took part in the protest. Protesters demanded among other, that the Erdogan government should resign, and shouted slogans that emphasized the fraternal ties between the people of Turkey and Syria.
Protest - HatayThe Deputy Chairman of the Workers Party – Turkey, Bayram Yurtçiçek, the Hatay Provincial Chair Bülent Çeküçoğlu and the Republican People’s Party (CHP) MP’s Refik Eryılmaz and Hasan Akgöl made speeches during the protests.
The Erdogan government is increasingly coming under fire for its state-sponsorship of radical islamist terrorist organizations, for waging a de-facto although undeclared war against Syria, for endangering the national security of Turkey, and for being ultimately responsible for the bomb blast in Rayhanh. The protesters were calling for that the responsible should be held accountable for the bombing.
Portest - ReyhanlıThe Workers Party´s Deputy Chairman Bayram Yurtçiçek stressed in his speech, that the “terror camps” in Hatay should be closed and that the terrorists should be deported.
The refugee camps in Hatay have since more than one year been documented to serve as hubs for the recruitment, training, financing, arming terrorist organizations and for other logistic operations related to Turkey´s war by proxy.
On 18 May, protests took also place in Rayhanh, where the bomb blast on 11 May killed dozens.In Reyhanh, police forces clashed with protesters in an attempt to prevent the demonstration, using barricades, water cannons, batons and tear gas.
Main opposition SYRIZA-EKM on Sunday commented on Prime Minister Antonis Samaras' visits to China and Azerbaijan, accusing the government that it has no plan apart from "turning the country into an immense Exclusive Economic Zone, a haven for local and international business capital and a hell for workers and the majority of society."
"While the Greek economy is collapsing as a result of the memorandum's policy and society is suffering from unemployment and poverty, the prime minister signs agreements to sell off the state's wealth and christens them 'investments'," the party's announcement said.
According to the announcement "the sellout of our strategic tools for growth and public property, the destruction of the environment and the dismantling of the welfare state, together with the starvation wages, turn the country into a third world state. Only the abrogation of the memorandum and its replacement wtih a national plan of productive reconstruction, development and support of the employment can halt the course towards disaster." (AMNA)
According to a report in a weekend edition of Britain’s Guardian newspaper, the European Union (EU) is directly funding US-backed Sunni Islamist terrorist groups fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. These groups are looting oil in parts of eastern Syria that they control and then re-selling it to EU countries at rock-bottom prices.
“The EU decision to lift Syrian oil sanctions to aid the opposition has accelerated a scramble for control over wells and pipelines in rebel-held areas and helped consolidate the grip of jihadist groups over the country’s key resources.”
According to the Guardian, the main beneficiaries of the EU’s lifting of sanctions are the Al Nusra Front and similar Islamist terrorist groups. “Jabhat al-Nusra, affiliated with Al Qaeda and other extreme Islamist groups, control the majority of the oil wells in Deir Ezzor province, displacing local Sunni tribes, sometimes by force. They have also seized control of other fields from Kurdish groups further to the north-east, in al-Hasakah governorate.”
The EU’s decision to resume trade with oil fields held by Al Nusra explodes the lie that the imperialist powers are waging war in Syria to change the repressive character of the Syrian regime. In fact, they are building up and backing deeply reactionary and oppressive forces.
These events also expose the so-called “war on terror”—the claim that Washington and the EU are fighting Al Qaeda, which served as the justification for US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—as a lie. Imperialism is arming and financing Al Qaeda-linked terrorist groups that commit terrible crimes against the Syrian population, handing over its wealth to the EU and Washington.
Germany’s Spiegel Online magazine recently reported how the Islamists dump Syrian oil on world markets at ultra-low prices: “Since February the Islamist rebel group Liwa al-Islam has controlled the al-Thaura oil-field in the ar-Raqqah governorate… The rebels in al-Thaura sell ten fuel truck cargos each day. They make good money and charge around $13 US for a barrel. On the world market, however, a barrel is traded for $100 US, but this is not of particular interest here.”
Abu Saif, an Islamist fighter of the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Ahrar Brigade, gives another account of how Islamists militias loot Syria: “Jabhat al-Nusra is investing in the Syrian economy to reinforce its position in Syria and Iraq. Al-Nusra fighters are selling everything that falls into their hands from wheat, archaeological relics, factory eq uipment, oil drilling and imaging machines, cars, spare parts and crude oil.”
To secure the oil, the terrorists murder everyone who gets in their way. In one widely reported case, Al Nusra fighters levelled the village of al-Musareb near Deir Ezzor, murdering 50 of its residents after a conflict with local tribesmen over an oil tanker. The mass killings through which terrorist groups control the territory needed to supply oil to European imperialism are documented in videos posted on YouTube.
The imperialist powers rely on terrorist groups as part of their strategy to control the vast energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia. This fundamental interest underlies the wars against Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, and on-going war preparations against Shiite Iran—to which the Alawite-dominated Assad regime has close ties. Like Syria, Iran has long been on imperialism’s hit list,” since Washington and its European and Middle Eastern allies see it as one of the main obstacles to controlling the oil trade of the Persian Gulf, and thus of the entire world.
This rape of Syria exposes the cynical decision by middle class pseudo-left organizations—such as the International Socialist Organization (ISO), the German Left Party, the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) in France, and the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) in Britain—to package the Syrian war as a “revolution.” Their class position emerges clearly in this point: they hail the looting of Syrian oil to boost the oil corporations’ profit margins as a “revolution,” and the looters as “revolutionaries.”
Increasing foreign support for the Sunni Islamist forces is accompanied by new threats by US imperialism and its allies to oust Assad, and increasing preparations for direct military intervention.
At a press conference with Turkish Prime Minister Reccep Tayyip Erdogan last Thursday in Washington, US President Barack Obama promised “to keep increasing the pressure on the Assad regime and working with the Syrian opposition. We both agree that Assad needs to go.”
Last Friday, CIA chief John Brennan met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon, Israel Defence Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, and Mossad head Tamir Pardo to discuss Syria. In a cabinet meeting the next day, Netanyahu threatened more Israeli air strikes against Syria, saying Israel would act “with determination… to ensure the supreme interest of the State of Israel [and] prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah and to [other] terrorist elements”.
Israel has already bombed Damascus two weeks ago, ostensibly to prevent arms being transferred from Syria to Hezbollah. The Lebanese Shia militia is a close ally of Syria and Iran and regarded as a main obstacle to Israeli military dominance in the Near East.
On Saturday Syrian president Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to the Argentine newspaper Clarin and the Argentine state news agency Telam, from his palace in the Syrian capital, Damascus. He vowed to keep power, accusing Israel and other “foreign powers” of supporting the Islamist opposition. “Israel is directly supporting the terrorist groups in two ways, firstly it gives them logistical support, and it also tells them what sites to attack and how to attack them,” he said.
He denied that his government had used chemical weapons, saying that “the West” might orchestrate an intervention based on false accusations: “The West lies and falsifies evidence to engineer wars; it is a habit of theirs.”
He called intervention “a clear probability, especially after we’ve managed to beat back armed groups in many areas of Syria.” However, he added that “we are willing to talk to anyone who wants to talk, without exception.”
Assad made clear that he hopes to keep power by convincing Washington that he is a stronger and more reliable custodian of US interests in the region than Al Qaeda: “America is pragmatic. If they found out they were defeated and the regime is the winner, the Americans will deal with the facts.”
This subservience to Washington exposes the bankruptcy of Arab nationalism. In fact, as the Guardian report makes clear, Washington and its European imperialist allies are funding and backing the Islamist opposition to break up the Syrian regime.
The Obama administration is also increasing its efforts to reach an agreement with Moscow, Syria’s main ally. Last weekend, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov agreed with his American counterpart John Kerry to set up a so-called “peace conference” in June, supposedly to negotiate an end to the Syrian war. During such a conference, Washington would press for a “negotiated” ouster of Assad and his replacement with a more pliable stooge regime approved by Moscow.
Lavrov is also trying to calm US and Israeli concerns about potential Russian missile sales to Syria. He stressed that these weapons would “not in any way alter the balance of forces in this region or give any advantage in the fight against the opposition.”
Russia is reportedly only supplying SS-N-26 coastal defense but not SA-21 air defense missiles, as part of a weapons deal already concluded in 2011. Lavrov also pledged that Russia would not sign any new deals with Syria.
Aside from hospitality, there are two other principles that dominate the soul of Cretans: Virtue and honour. These are also followed by other typical Greek principles such as deep ethical values, the value of friendship, and the love for the family. The Cretan soul often reaches the point of exaggeration in their valor and passion for freedom, their courage, their strength, their love for Greece and this country's culture and they are known world wide for their hospitality towards strangers. Certainly Crete's new ad campaign brings this to life.
(Talk about an eye-opening analysis! This is definitely a MUST READ!)
Author’s Note - In the course of the last three years, there has been a surge in Afghan opium production. The Vienna based UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) reveals that poppy cultivation in 2012 extends over an area of more than 154,000 hectares, an increase of 18% over 2011. A UNODC spokesperson has confirmed that opium production is heading towards record levels.
According to the 2012 Afghanistan Opium Survey released in November 2012 by the Ministry of Counter Narcotics (MCN) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), potential opium production in 2012 was of the order of 3,700 tons, according to UNODC data.
There is reason to believe that this figure of 3700 tons is grossly underestimated. While bad weather and damaged crops may have played a role as suggested by the UNODC, the estimated potential production for an area of cultivation of 154,000 hectares, is well in excess of 6000 tons. With 80,000 hectares in cultivation in 2003, production was already of the order of 3600 tons.
It is worth noting that UNODC has modified the concepts and figures on opium sales and heroin production, as outlined by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA).
A change in UN methodology in 2010 resulted in a sharp downward revision of Afghan heroin production estimates for 2004 to 2011. UNODC used to estimate that the entire global opium crop was processed into heroin, and provided global heroin production estimates on that basis. Before 2010, a global conversion rate of about 10 kg of opium to 1 kg of heroin was used to estimate world heroin production (17). For instance, the estimated 4 620 tonnes of opium harvested worldwide in 2005 was thought to make it possible to manufacture 472 tonnes of heroin (UNODC, 2009a). However, UNODC now estimates that a large proportion of the Afghan opium harvest is not processed into heroin or morphine but remains ‘available on the drug market as opium’ (UNODC, 2010a). …EU drug markets report: a strategic analysis, EMCDDA, Lisbon, January 2013 emphasis added
There is no evidence that a large percentage of opium production is no longer processed into heroin as claimed by the UN. This revised UNODC methodology has served, –through the outright manipulation of statistical concepts– to artificially reduce the size of of the global trade in heroin.
According to the UNODC, quoted in the EMCDDA report:
“an estimated 3 400 tonnes of Afghan opium was not transformed into heroin or morphine in 2011. Compared with previous years, this is an exceptionally high proportion of the total crop, representing nearly 60 % of the Afghan opium harvest and close to 50 % of the global harvest in 2011.
What the UNODC, –whose mandate is to support the prevention of organized criminal activity– has done is to obfuscate the size and criminal nature of the Afghan drug trade, intimating –without evidence– that a large part of the opium is no longer channeled towards the illegal heroin market.
In 2012, according to the UNODC farm gate prices for opium were of the order of 196 per kg. Each kg. of opium produces 100 grams of pure heroin. The US retail prices for heroin (with a low level of purity) is, according to UNODC of the order of $172 a gram. The price per gram of pure heroin is substantially higher.
The profits are largely reaped at the level of the international wholesale and retail markets of heroin as well as in the process of money laundering in Western banking institutions. The revenues derived from the global trade in heroin constitute a multi billion dollar bonanza for financial institutions and organized crime.
The following article first published in May 2005 provides a background on the history of the Afghan opium trade which continues to this date to be protected by US-NATO occupation forces on behalf of powerful financial interests.
The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Heroin Trade
Since the US led invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, the Golden Crescent opium trade has soared. According to the US media, this lucrative contraband is protected by Osama, the Taliban, not to mention, of course, the regional warlords, in defiance of the “international community”.
The heroin business is said to be “filling the coffers of the Taliban”. In the words of the US State Department:
“Opium is a source of literally billions of dollars to extremist and criminal groups… [C]utting down the opium supply is central to establishing a secure and stable democracy, as well as winning the global war on terrorism,” (Statement of Assistant Secretary of State Robert Charles. Congressional Hearing, 1 April 2004)
According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), opium production in Afghanistan in 2003 is estimated at 3,600 tons, with an estimated area under cultivation of the order of 80,000 hectares. (UNODC at http://www.unodc.org/unodc/index.html ).An even larger bumper harvest is predicted for 2004.
The State Department suggests that up to 120 000 hectares were under cultivation in 2004. (Congressional Hearing, op cit):
”We could be on a path for a significant surge. Some observers indicate perhaps as much as 50 percent to 100 percent growth in the 2004 crop over the already troubling figures from last year.”(Ibid)
“Operation Containment“
In response to the post-Taliban surge in opium production, the Bush administration has boosted its counter terrorism activities, while allocating substantial amounts of public money to the Drug Enforcement Administration’s West Asia initiative, dubbed “Operation Containment.”
The various reports and official statements are, of course, blended in with the usual “balanced” self critique that “the international community is not doing enough”, and that what we need is “transparency”.
The headlines are “Drugs, warlords and insecurity overshadow Afghanistan’s path to democracy”. In chorus, the US media is accusing the defunct “hard-line Islamic regime”, without even acknowledging that the Taliban –in collaboration with the United Nations– had imposed a successful ban on poppy cultivation in 2000. Opium production declined by more than 90 per cent in 2001. In fact the surge in opium cultivation production coincided with the onslaught of the US-led military operation and the downfall of the Taliban regime. From October through December 2001, farmers started to replant poppy on an extensive basis.
The success of Afghanistan’s 2000 drug eradication program under the Taliban had been acknowledged at the October 2001 session of the UN General Assembly (which took place barely a few days after the beginning of the 2001 bombing raids). No other UNODC member country was able to implement a comparable program:
“Turning first to drug control, I had expected to concentrate my remarks on the implications of the Taliban’s ban on opium poppy cultivation in areas under their control… We now have the results of our annual ground survey of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. This year’s production [2001] is around 185 tons. This is down from the 3300 tons last year [2000], a decrease of over 94 per cent. Compared to the record harvest of 4700 tons two years ago, the decrease is well over 97 per cent.
Any decrease in illicit cultivation is welcomed, especially in cases like this when no displacement, locally or in other countries, took place to weaken the achievement” (Remarks on behalf of UNODC Executive Director at the UN General Assembly, Oct 2001, http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/speech_2001-10-12_1.html )
United Nations’ Coverup
In the wake of the US invasion, shift in rhetoric. UNODC is now acting as if the 2000 opium ban had never happened:
“the battle against narcotics cultivation has been fought and won in other countries and it [is] possible to do so here [in Afghanistan], with strong, democratic governance, international assistance and improved security and integrity.” ( Statement of the UNODC Representative in Afghanistan at the :February 2004 International Counter Narcotics Conference, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/afg/afg_intl_counter_narcotics_conf_2004.pdf , p. 5).
In fact, both Washington and the UNODC now claim that the objective of the Taliban in 2000 was not really “drug eradication” but a devious scheme to trigger “an artificial shortfall in supply”, which would drive up World prices of heroin.
Ironically, this twisted logic, which now forms part of a new “UN consensus”, is refuted by a report of the UNODC office in Pakistan, which confirmed, at the time, that there was no evidence of stockpiling by the Taliban. (Deseret News, Salt Lake City, Utah. 5 October 2003)
Washington’s Hidden Agenda: Restore the Drug Trade
In the wake of the 2001 US bombing of Afghanistan, the British government of Tony Blair was entrusted by the G-8 Group of leading industrial nations to carry out a drug eradication program, which would, in theory, allow Afghan farmers to switch out of poppy cultivation into alternative crops. The British were working out of Kabul in close liaison with the US DEA’s “Operation Containment”.
The UK sponsored crop eradication program is an obvious smokescreen. Since October 2001, opium poppy cultivation has skyrocketed. The presence of occupation forces in Afghanistan did not result in the eradication of poppy cultivation. Quite the opposite.
The Taliban prohibition had indeed caused “the beginning of a heroin shortage in Europe by the end of 2001″, as acknowledged by the UNODC.
Heroin is a multibillion dollar business supported by powerful interests, which requires a steady and secure commodity flow. One of the “hidden” objectives of the war was precisely to restore the CIA sponsored drug trade to its historical levels and exert direct control over the drug routes.
Immediately following the October 2001 invasion, opium markets were restored. Opium prices spiraled. By early 2002, the opium price (in dollars/kg) was almost 10 times higher than in 2000.
In 2001, under the Taliban opiate production stood at 185 tons, increasing to 3400 tons in 2002 under the US sponsored puppet regime of President Hamid Karzai.
While highlighting Karzai’s patriotic struggle against the Taliban, the media fails to mention that Karzai collaborated with the Taliban. He had also been on the payroll of a major US oil company, UNOCAL. In fact, since the mid-1990s, Hamid Karzai had acted as a consultant and lobbyist for UNOCAL in negotiations with the Taliban. According to the Saudi newspaper Al-Watan:
“Karzai has been a Central Intelligence Agency covert operator since the 1980s. He collaborated with the CIA in funneling U.S. aid to the Taliban as of 1994 when the Americans had secretly and through the Pakistanis [specifically the ISI] supported the Taliban’s assumption of power.” (quoted in Karen Talbot, U.S. Energy Giant Unocal Appoints Interim Government in Kabul, Global Outlook, No. 1, Spring 2002. p. 70. See also BBC Monitoring Service, 15 December 2001)
History of the Golden Crescent Drug trade
It is worth recalling the history of the Golden Crescent drug trade, which is intimately related to the CIA’s covert operations in the region since the onslaught of the Soviet-Afghan war and its aftermath.
Prior to the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1989), opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets. There was no local production of heroin. (Alfred McCoy, Drug Fallout: the CIA’s Forty Year Complicity in the Narcotics Trade. The Progressive, 1 August 1997).
The Afghan narcotics economy was a carefully designed project of the CIA, supported by US foreign policy.
As revealed in the Iran-Contra and Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) scandals, CIA covert operations in support of the Afghan Mujahideen had been funded through the laundering of drug money. “Dirty money” was recycled –through a number of banking institutions (in the Middle East) as well as through anonymous CIA shell companies–, into “covert money,” used to finance various insurgent groups during the Soviet-Afghan war, and its aftermath:
“Because the US wanted to supply the Mujahideen rebels in Afghanistan with stinger missiles and other military hardware it needed the full cooperation of Pakistan. By the mid-1980s, the CIA operation in Islamabad was one of the largest US intelligence stations in the World. `If BCCI is such an embarrassment to the US that forthright investigations are not being pursued it has a lot to do with the blind eye the US turned to the heroin trafficking in Pakistan’, said a US intelligence officer. (“The Dirtiest Bank of All,” Time, July 29, 1991, p. 22.)
Researcher Alfred McCoy’s study confirms that within two years of the onslaught of the CIA’s covert operation in Afghanistan in 1979, “the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 per cent of U.S. demand. In Pakistan, the heroin-addict population went from near zero in 1979 to 1.2 million by 1985, a much steeper rise than in any other nation.”
“CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests.
U.S. officials had refused to investigate charges of heroin dealing by its Afghan allies because U.S. narcotics policy in Afghanistan has been subordinated to the war against Soviet influence there. In 1995, the former CIA director of the Afghan operation, Charles Cogan, admitted the CIA had indeed sacrificed the drug war to fight the Cold War. ‘Our main mission was to do as much damage as possible to the Soviets. We didn’t really have the resources or the time to devote to an investigation of the drug trade,’ I don’t think that we need to apologize for this. Every situation has its fallout. There was fallout in terms of drugs, yes. But the main objective was accomplished. The Soviets left Afghanistan.’”(McCoy, op cit)
The role of the CIA, which is amply documented, is not mentioned in official UNODC publications, which focus on internal social and political factors. Needless to say, the historical roots of the opium trade have been grossly distorted. (See UNODC http://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/afg_opium_economy_www.pdf
According to the UNODC, Afghanistan’s opium production has increased, more than 15-fold since 1979. In the wake of the Soviet-Afghan war, the growth of the narcotics economy has continued unabated. The Taliban, which were supported by the US, were initially instrumental in the further growth of opiate production until the 2000 opium ban. (See UNODC http://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/afg_opium_economy_www.pdf
This recycling of drug money was used to finance the post-Cold War insurgencies in Central Asia and the Balkans including Al Qaeda. (For details, see Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, The Truth behind September 11, Global Outlook, 2002, http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html )
Narcotics: Second to Oil and the Arms Trade
The revenues generated from the CIA sponsored Afghan drug trade are sizeable. The Afghan trade in opiates constitutes a large share of the worldwide annual turnover of narcotics, which was estimated by the United Nations to be of the order of $400-500 billion. (Douglas Keh, Drug Money in a Changing World, Technical document No. 4, 1998, Vienna UNDCP, p. 4. See also United Nations Drug Control Program, Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 1999, E/INCB/1999/1 United Nations, Vienna 1999, p. 49-51, and Richard Lapper, UN Fears Growth of Heroin Trade, Financial Times, 24 February 2000). At the time these UN figures were first brought out (1994), the (estimated) global trade in drugs was of the same order of magnitude as the global trade in oil.
The IMF estimated global money laundering to be between 590 billion and 1.5 trillion dollars a year, representing 2-5 percent of global GDP. (Asian Banker, 15 August 2003). A large share of global money laundering as estimated by the IMF is linked to the trade in narcotics.
Based on recent figures (2003), drug trafficking constitutes “the third biggest global commodity in cash terms after oil and the arms trade.” (The Independent, 29 February 2004).
Moreover, the above figures including those on money laundering, confirm that the bulk of the revenues associated with the global trade in narcotics are not appropriated by terrorist groups and warlords, as suggested by the UNODC report.
There are powerful business and financial interests behind narcotics. From this standpoint, geopolitical and military control over the drug routes is as strategic as oil and oil pipelines. However, what distinguishes narcotics from legal commodity trade is that narcotics constitutes a major source of wealth formation not only for organised crime but also for the US intelligence apparatus, which increasingly constitutes a powerful actor in the spheres of finance and banking.
In turn, the CIA, which protects the drug trade, has developed complex business and undercover links to major criminal syndicates involved in the drug trade.
In other words, intelligence agencies and powerful business syndicates allied with organized crime, are competing for the strategic control over the heroin routes. The multi-billion dollar revenues of narcotics are deposited in the Western banking system. Most of the large international banks together with their affiliates in the offshore banking havens launder large amounts of narco-dollars.
This trade can only prosper if the main actors involved in narcotics have “political friends in high places.” Legal and illegal undertakings are increasingly intertwined, the dividing line between “businesspeople” and criminals is blurred. In turn, the relationship among criminals, politicians and members of the intelligence establishment has tainted the structures of the state and the role of its institutions.
Where does the money go? Who benefits from the Afghan opium trade?
This trade is characterized by a complex web of intermediaries. There are various stages of the drug trade, several interlocked markets, from the impoverished poppy farmer in Afghanistan to the wholesale and retail heroin markets in Western countries. In other words, there is a “hierarchy of prices” for opiates.
This hierarchy of prices is acknowledged by the US administration:
“Afghan heroin sells on the international narcotics market for 100 times the price farmers get for their opium right out of the field”.(US State Department quoted by the Voice of America (VOA), 27 February 2004).
According to the UNODC, opium in Afghanistan generated in 2003 “an income of one billion US dollars for farmers and US$ 1.3 billion for traffickers, equivalent to over half of its national income.”
Consistent with these UNODC estimates, the average price for fresh opium was $350 a kg. (2002); the 2002 production was 3400 tons. (http://www.poppies.org/news/104267739031389.shtml ).
The UNDOC estimate, based on local farmgate and wholesale prices constitutes, however, a very small percentage of the total turnover of the multibillion dollar Afghan drug trade. The UNODC, estimates “the total annual turn-over of international trade” in Afghan opiates at US$ 30 billion. An examination of the wholesale and retail prices for heroin in the Western countries suggests, however, that the total revenues generated, including those at the retail level, are substantially higher.
Wholesale Prices of Heroin in Western Countries
It is estimated that one kilo of opium produces approximately 100 grams of (pure) heroin. The US DEA confirms that “SWA [South West Asia meaning Afghanistan] heroin in New York City was selling in the late 1990s for $85,000 to $190,000 per kilogram wholesale with a 75 percent purity ratio (National Drug Intelligence Center, http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs/648/ny_econ.htm ).
According to the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) “the price of SEA [South East Asian] heroin ranges from $70,000 to $100,000 per unit (700 grams) and the purity of SEA heroin ranges from 85 to 90 percent” (ibid). The SEA unit of 700 gr (85-90 % purity) translates into a wholesale price per kg. for pure heroin ranging between $115,000 and $163,000.
The DEA figures quoted above, while reflecting the situation in the 1990s, are broadly consistent with recent British figures. According to a report published in the Guardian (11 August 2002), the wholesale price of (pure) heroin in London (UK) was of the order of 50,000 pounds sterling, approximately $80,000 (2002).
Whereas as there is competition between different sources of heroin supply, it should be emphasized that Afghan heroin represents a rather small percentage of the US heroin market, which is largely supplied out of Colombia.
Retail Prices
In the US - “The NYPD notes that retail heroin prices are down and purity is relatively high. Heroin previously sold for about $90 per gram but now sells for $65 to $70 per gram or less. Anecdotal information from the NYPD indicates that purity for a bag of heroin commonly ranges from 50 to 80 percent but can be as low as 30 percent. Information as of June 2000 indicates that bundles (10 bags) purchased by Dominican buyers from Dominican sellers in larger quantities (about 150 bundles) sold for as little as $40 each, or $55 each in Central Park. DEA reports that an ounce of heroin usually sells for $2,500 to $5,000, a gram for $70 to $95, a bundle for $80 to $90, and a bag for $10. The DMP reports that the average heroin purity at the street level in 1999 was about 62 percent.” (National Drug Intelligence Center, http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs/648/ny_econ.htm ).
The NYPD and DEA retail price figures seem consistent. The DEA price of $70-$95, with a purity of 62 percent translates into $112 to $153 per gram of pure heroin. The NYPD figures are roughly similar with perhaps lower estimates for purity.
It should be noted that when heroin is purchased in very small quantities, the retail price tends to be much higher. In the US, purchase is often by “the bag”; the typical bag according to Rocheleau and Boyum contains 25 milligrams of pure heroin.(http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/drugfact/american_users_spend/appc.html )
A $10 dollar bag in NYC (according to the DEA figure quoted above) would convert into a price of $400 per gram, each bag containing 0.025gr. of pure heroin. (op cit). In other words, for very small purchases marketed by street pushers, the retail margin tends to be significantly higher. In the case of the $10 bag purchase, it is roughly 3 to 4 times the corresponding retail price per gram.($112-$153)
UK
In the UK - In Britain, the retail street price per gram of heroin, according to British Police sources, “has fallen from £74 in 1997 to £61 [in 2004].” [i.e. from approximately $133 to $110, based on the 2004 rate of exchange] (Independent, 3 March 2004). In some cities it was as low as £30-40 per gram with a low level of purity. (AAP News, 3 March 2004). According to Drugscope (http://www.drugscope.org.uk/ ), the average price for a gram of heroin in Britain is between £40 and £90 ($72- $162 per gram) (The report does not mention purity). The street price of heroin was £60 per gram in April 2002 according to the National Criminal Intelligence Service. (See:http://www.drugscope.org.uk/druginfo/drugsearch/ds_results.asp?file=%5Cwip%5C11%5C1%5C1%5Cheroin_opiates.html )
The Hierarchy of Prices
We are dealing with a hierarchy of prices, from the farmgate price in the producing country, upwards, to the final retail street price. The latter is often 80-100 times the price paid to the farmer.
In other words, the opiate product transits through several markets from the producing country to the transshipment country(ies), to the consuming countries. In the latter, there are wide margins between “the landing price” at the point of entry, demanded by the drug cartels and the wholesale prices and the retail street prices, protected by Western organized crime.
The Global Proceeds of the Afghan Narcotics Trade
In Afghanistan, the reported production of 3600 tons of opium in 2003 would allow for the production of approximately 360,000 kg of pure heroin. Gross revenues accruing to Afghan farmers are roughly estimated by the UNODC to be of the order of $1 billion, with 1.3 billion accruing to local traffickers.
When sold in Western markets at a heroin wholesale price of the order of $100,000 a kg (with a 70 percent purity ratio), the global wholesale proceeds (corresponding to 3600 tons of Afghan opium) would be of the order of 51.4 billion dollars. The latter constitutes a conservative estimate based on the various figures for wholesale prices in the previous section.
The total proceeds of the Afghan narcotics trade (in terms of total value added) is estimated using the final heroin retail price. In other words, the retail value of the trade is ultimately the criterion for measuring the importance of the drug trade in terms of revenue generation and wealth formation.
A meaningful estimate of the retail value, however, is almost impossible to ascertain due to the fact that retail prices vary considerably within urban areas, from one city to another and between consuming countries, not to mention variations in purity and quality (see above).
The evidence on retail margins, namely the difference between wholesale and retail values in the consuming countries, nonetheless, suggests that a large share of the total (money) proceeds of the drug trade are generated at the retail level.
In other words, a significant portion of the proceeds of the drug trade accrues to criminal and business syndicates in Western countries involved in the local wholesale and retail narcotics markets. And the various criminal gangs involved in retail trade are invariably protected by the “corporate” crime syndicates. 90 percent of heroin consumed in the UK is from Afghanistan. Using the British retail price figure from UK police sources of $110 a gram (with an assumed 50 percent purity level), the total retail value of the Afghan narcotics trade in 2003 (3600 tons of opium) would be the order of 79.2 billion dollars. The latter should be considered as a simulation rather than an estimate.
Under this assumption (simulation), a billion dollars gross revenue to the farmers in Afghanistan (2003) would generate global narcotics earnings, –accruing at various stages and in various markets– of the order of 79.2 billion dollars. These global proceeds accrue to business syndicates, intelligence agencies, organized crime, financial institutions, wholesalers, retailers, etc. involved directly or indirectly in the drug trade.
In turn, the proceeds of this lucrative trade are deposited in Western banks, which constitute an essential mechanism in the laundering of dirty money.
A very small percentage accrues to farmers and traders in the producing country. Bear in mind that the net income accruing to Afghan farmers is but a fraction of the estimated 1 billion dollar amount. The latter does not include payments of farm inputs, interest on loans to money lenders, political protection, etc. (See also UNODC, The Opium Economy in Afghanistan, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/afg_opium_economy_www.pdf , Vienna, 2003, p. 7-8)
The Share of the Afghan Heroin in the Global Drug Market
Afghanistan produces over 70 percent of the global supply of heroin and heroin represents a sizeable fraction of the global narcotics market, estimated by the UN to be of the order of $400-500 billion. There are no reliable estimates on the distribution of the global narcotics trade between the main categories: Cocaine, Opium/Heroin, Cannabis, Amphetamine Type Stimulants (ATS), Other Drugs.
The Laundering of Drug Money
The proceeds of the drug trade are deposited in the banking system. Drug money is laundered in the numerous offshore banking havens in Switzerland, Luxembourg, the British Channel Islands, the Cayman Islands and some 50 other locations around the globe. It is here that the criminal syndicates involved in the drug trade and the representatives of the world’s largest commercial banks interact. Dirty money is deposited in these offshore havens, which are controlled by the major Western commercial banks. The latter have a vested interest in maintaining and sustaining the drug trade. (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, The Crimes of Business and the Business of Crimes, Covert Action Quarterly, Fall 1996)
Once the money has been laundered, it can be recycled into bona fide investments not only in real estate, hotels, etc, but also in other areas such as the services economy and manufacturing. Dirty and covert money is also funneled into various financial instruments including the trade in derivatives, primary commodities, stocks, and government bonds.
Accession of Turkey to the European Union (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Turkey's EU Affairs Minister Egemen Bagış earlier last week criticized the draft recommendation penned by Sommer on the readmission agreement. (We wonder why? lol)
German Christian Democrat Renate Sommer - Despite its consent to the signing of the readmission agreement by Brussels, a central pillar of visa facilitation negotiations between the European Union and Turkey, the European Parliament has harshly criticized Turkey, alleging that Ankara has not fulfilled “a single point of the Copenhagen Criteria.”
A draft recommendation seen by Turkish press and penned by German Christian Democrat Renate Sommer on the “readmission agreement” claims that Turkey has been “the main transit country for illegal immigration” into the European Union. (Noooooooooooooooooo..... !!!)
Ankara has categorically denied this sort of assessment on previous occasions. (As always)
In the “Background” section of the draft, the report says: “The land route through Turkey to Greece is currently the route most frequently used by migrants and refugees travelling to the European Union from all over the world. This makes Turkey the main transit country for illegal immigration into the European Union.”
In an odd note, the rapporteur argues that Turkey has “suddenly” changed its mind and started asking for visa liberalization conditional on signing the readmission agreement.
“Turkey has also done no more than initial the agreement so far, since the Turkish side suddenly decided to make its signing of the agreement conditional on the European Union drawing up a roadmap for visa liberalization,” says the draft.
The draft, which was discussed last week by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the EP, has been criticized by Ankara. Sources speaking to Turkish press on the condition of anonymity, said the rapporteur refused to take advice and contributions and the end-result was counter-productive.
The Turkish side says there are also factual mistakes in the draft that alleges that Turkey is asking for visa-liberalization before the signing of the readmission agreement. Ankara has been asking for a parallel process.
In the “rapporteur's position” section of the draft, Sommer raises harsh criticism vis-à-vis Turkey. Claiming that the EU has responded positively to Turkey's requests, the draft asks Turkey to sign the readmission agreement “without delay.” It also alleges that Turkey has adopted a new approach that is unacceptable.
The new approach taken by Turkey, i.e., to delay ratifying the readmission agreement until the European Union introduces practical visa facilitation measures for Turkish citizens is not acceptable, according to the draft, implying that Ankara has been using illegal immigration to blackmail Brussels. “Turkey cannot use mass illegal migration through its territory to Greece as a means of exerting pressure on the European Union,” it says.
Drawing attention to the Cypriot problem, the draft says Turkey has not accepted the integrity of the EU by not recognizing the Greek Cypriot administration as the sole representative of the island. The Annan plan brokered by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in April 2004 to unite the island was overwhelmingly refused by the Greek Cypriots but accepted by the Cypriot Turks. Despite Turks' acceptance, they have been left out of the EU.
The rapporteur also argues that the accession talks would remain blocked as long as Turkey refused to recognize the Greek Cypriot administration.
The most serious allegation of the draft is the assessment that Turkey does not comply with “a single point” of the Copenhagen criteria (CC). Compliance with the CC is a pre-condition to start accession talks that commenced with Turkey in October 2005.
“Along with other shortcomings, this sweeping restriction on freedom of opinion and freedom of the press contravenes the Copenhagen political criteria for the pre-accession process; Turkey was supposed to have met these criteria even before the opening of accession negotiations, but it still does not comply with a single point,” claims the draft. This allegation has deeply disturbed Ankara.
The draft welcomes the readmission agreement as it creates “an open perspective” process like the accession talks without any “automatic” commitments. “…Welcomes the Commission's decision to link the drafting of an action plan for visa liberalization to strict criteria. The emphasis placed on the fact that this is a 'gradual process' with a 'long-term perspective' also matches the open perspective characterizing the accession negotiations. The visa action plan represents a significant move on the European Union's part to meet Turkey's wishes, without entailing any automatic mechanism,” says the draft.
Sommer concludes her draft by giving a positive opinion to the signing of the readmission agreement by warning Turkey not to make additional demands and to sign the agreement “without further delay.”
The talks between Turkey and EU on visa liberalization have been stuck since the EU increased its demands from Turkey in an “action plan” that was originally prepared by the European Commission. The date for the voting of the draft has not been set.
In the meantime, Turkey's EU Affairs Minister Egemen Bağış on Tuesday criticized the draft recommendation penned by Sommer on the readmission agreement.
“We see it as the delirium of a deputy. We don't take it seriously. We hold talks concerning visas with the EU Commission. We cannot sacrifice these talks due to the efforts of a deputy to attract attention. If we had said ‘yes' to such ungrounded demands, we would have put the action plan into action. But we did not care about this and requested the preparation of an action plan that includes our sensitivities, and we are after our request.”
The above lengthy interview from 1996 with Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash (1924-2012), which is mostly worthless and embarrassingly conducted by some Greek Cypriot who instead of taking the opportunity to expose Denktash for the nationalist fanatic he was chooses to ask him questions such as ‘Who is the real Rauf Denktash?’ ‘How did you meet your wife?’ and ‘What are your hobbies?’ (I kid you not). Like a lot of Greek Cypriots, the interviewer just can’t get his head around the fact that the Turkish minority in Cyprus developed a political consciousness and will independent of Greek Cypriots; and that the Turks on the island were never prepared to passively accept Greek preponderance, or somehow be persuaded to become less Turkish.
Indeed, in the one or two interesting moments in the interview, Denktash paints an entirely different (and largely unknown to Greek Cypriots) picture of Turkish Cypriot political consciousness as it developed during British colonial rule. Denktash laughs at the often-repeated Greek Cypriot claim that in the enosis plebiscite of 1950, a majority of Turkish Cypriots voted for union with Greece and asserts that for Turkish Cypriots accepting Greek rule was tantamount to accepting colonisation.
Denktash states that just as Greek Cypriots ardently believed that Cyprus is Greek and belonged to Greece, the Turkish minority on the island held that Cyprus is Turkish and should be relinquished to Turkey. ‘We [the Turkish Cypriots],’ Denktash says, ‘were brought up to believe that Cyprus is Turkish and Cyprus has gone from Turkey temporarily and Turkey will come back’.
The axiom that Cyprus is Turkish was so deeply held by Turkish Cypriots, Denktash says, that he was disappointed by Turkey’s decision in 1956 to change its policy of demanding Britain cede to it the entire island in favour of a policy of partitioning Cyprus between Greece and Turkey. ‘Partition was chosen by Turkey as a policy’, Denktash says. ‘We [the Turkish Cypriots] were aggrieved here, because we felt Turkey was abandoning half of Cyprus to the Greeks.’
On the depth of militancy within the Turkish Cypriot community, Denktash reveals that seven years before Greeks took up arms in the campaign for enosis, Turkish Cypriots were prepared to use violence to thwart the political will of the Greek Cypriots, who constituted 80 percent of the island’s population. ‘In the event of enosis,’ Denktash recalls telling a Greek journalist in 1948, ‘we will take up guns and go to the mountains.’
I’m mentioning all this now because I’ve been reading Stella Soulioti’s excellent two-volume work – a must for all serious students of the Cyprus Question – Fettered Independence: Cyprus, 1878-1964, in which the author provides a remarkably detailed and coherent account of modern Cypriot political history, with particular emphasis on the various plans concocted by the British colonial authorities in the 1950s in response to Greek demands for enosis and Turkish insistence on partition; the machinations that led to the London-Zurich agreements in 1959; the period from independence in 1960 to the breakdown of the constitution and the insurrection of the Turkish Cypriots in 1963; and the increasing involvement in the island’s politics of the Americans, who wanted to avoid Cyprus sparking a war between Greece and Turkey, which the USA thought could best be done by partitioning Cyprus between the two NATO allies or offering all (or most) of Cyprus to Greece in exchange for Greek concessions in Thrace and/or the Aegean, such as the ceding of Chios or Kastelorizo to Turkey.
In upcoming posts, I will draw on Soulioti’s book to illustrate how the Turkish campaign for the partition of Cyprus was predicated on violence and stirring up enmity between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. Unlike enosis – which was not directed at the Turkish minority on the island but at the British colonial authorities – taksim (partition) was specifically aimed at Greek Cypriots and could only be achieved through their violent expulsion from that part of Cyprus that Turkey proposed to annex.
If you enjoy HellasFrappe please help us continue maintaining the free flow of information. We need donations to continue operating, now more than ever. HellasFrappe is dedicated to bringing you up-to-date information on matters that concern Greece and the wider region. Our pursuit of truthful information is a constant and evolving journey. We spend hundreds of hours every month to produce quality postings, blogs, articles, etc. with no expectations from our audience other than their attention to critical matters that affect the Motherland. Your donation helps us maintain this service. In the months to come, and with the help of your donations, we want to develop a database, get server support, get better graphic design and start up an online radio station. Help us to continue operating by clicking on the donate button below and make a donation today. No amount is too small, or too big, it all counts.
The articles posted on HellasFrappe are for entertainment and education purposes only. The views expressed here are solely those of the contributing author and do not necessarily reflect the views of HellasFrappe. Our blog believes in free speech and does not warrant the content on this site. You use the information at your own risk.
Search
Loading...
Help us raise funds
Support independent and alternative media by making a donation to HellasFrappe. Our fundraiser is underway. You too can support independent media by making a contribution! Make a donation today!
Donate
If you enjoy HellasFrappe please help us continue maintaining the free flow of information. We need donations to continue operating, now more than ever. HellasFrappe is dedicated to bringing you up-to-date information on matters that concern Greece and the wider region. Our pursuit of truthful information is a constant and evolving journey. We spend hundreds of hours every month to produce quality postings, blogs, articles, etc. with no expectations from our audience other than their attention to critical matters that affect the Motherland. Your donation helps us maintain this service. In the months to come, and with the help of your donations, we want to develop a database, get server support, get better graphic design and start up an online radio station. Help us to continue operating by clicking on the donate button below and make a donation today. No amount is too small, or too big, it all counts.
Posts
