web analytics

HAMID KARZAI ON THE CIA PAYROLL

By Pete Moore On April 29th, 2013

For some reason, the CIA has been dropping off tens of millions of dollars to Karzai’s office for over a decade. The payments – cash packed in suitcases, rucksacks and plastic bags – are still being made. The New York Times reports:

For more than a decade, wads of American dollars packed into suitcases, backpacks and, on occasion, plastic shopping bags have been dropped off every month or so at the offices of Afghanistan’s president — courtesy of the Central Intelligence Agency.

All told, tens of millions of dollars have flowed from the C.I.A. to the office of President Hamid Karzai, according to current and former advisers to the Afghan leader.

But without government, who will make Karzai stinkingly rich?

Moreover, there is little evidence that the payments bought the influence the C.I.A. sought. Instead, some American officials said, the cash has fueled corruption and empowered warlords, undermining Washington’s exit strategy from Afghanistan.

“The biggest source of corruption in Afghanistan,” one American official said, “was the United States.”

Someone thinks this is good policy – for themselves. Goodness knows the useless Karzai isn’t worth it. I can only imagine alot of cash has been channeled round to American-owned bank accounts in exotic places.

36 Responses to “HAMID KARZAI ON THE CIA PAYROLL”

  1. I read this today. It’s very disturbing. We basically have no allies in Afghanistan ( or Pakistan ).

    Karzai and his buddies were taking cash from the US and Iran simultaneously, while both were aware of the others’ involvement!

  2. Nice catch Pete, and an utterly insane policy that has little effect.

    It was ever thus in Afghanistan where bribery is more common than air. But it doesn’t mean we have to perpetuate it.

  3. Some pretend that the NY Times and other major media are in the pocket of government and industry.

    But the NYT has a very long history of investigative reporting that is deeply embarrassing to Democratic and Republican presidents, to corporations, or anyone else.

    There is no substitute for ” real ” media with real reporters and real editors / fact checkers.

  4. This only reinforces the ultimate stupidity of putting boots and lives into the swamp that is Afghanistan. Not to mention the waste of American taxpayers’ money however it is delivered.
    We like to pour scorn on the USSR’s failed adventure into the region, but the truth is that the west has also failed -however the politicians dress it up.

  5. If you could buy the warlords, I’d be all for it. That could be the best return on investment evah, the most moral course of action in a filthy part of the world.

    But the problem is that these guys don’t stay bought. Even when on the payroll, Karzai isn’t a competent ally.

  6. Good post Pete.

    And Phantom @ 4.55. Well said.

  7. Phantom,
    The thing is though that we have known for years -a hundred and more that the warlords cannot be trusted. They have their inter tribal conflicts and their code of honour. Personally I don’t have a problem with that. It’s their country. As long as they stay there and we stay here…

  8. And they, – the invaders, Britain, Russia, America just knew that Afghanistan was the place for ‘poppy’, – the only problem was that the Afghan means folding cash when they talk of ‘poppy’, while the clunky, junky ‘big head know-it-alls’ all thought they meant those pretty red flowers…

    For our Yank friends – ‘poppy’ is an old Cockney term for paper money.

  9. The CIA gets its money from ‘off-line’ operations, such as the enormous opium crop protected by British and American troops. But the added-value bit is that the opium is refined into heroin in Afghanistan so that the product exported in military planes is less bulky and more profitable. It’s just part of the CIA’s business portfolio.

  10. Allan

    You’re a fraud.

    If the CIA was funded by drugs, then my tax bill would not be so high.

    Stop snorting the Drano.

    Things are bad enough as it is, you don’t need to make **** up.

  11. I wouldn’t object to bribing Hamid Karzai if he actually delivered something useful.

  12. It’s pretty likely that the initial Taliban collapse in 2001 was due to their allied warlords being paid off.

  13. “Stop snorting the Drano.”

    You been spyin’ on him Phantom??
    Snorting toxic substances is common among Los Conspiriciados of Aberdeen … 🙂

  14. It’s money down the Karzai..

  15. Mine is better Colm..

  16. Los Conspiriciados of Aberdeen

    Hearty lol !

  17. I have had a silicone chip installed in Allan’s head. I monitor all his thoughts now.

  18. Poor old Allan
    How they tease him!

    Whoever THEY are……. 🙂

  19. The Illuminati?

  20. No Petr,
    that’s Blackpool surely?

  21. If Allan was ever up in court on a charge (perish the thought)… the only words he would hear at the end of the trial is when the Judge asks for the verdict…

    “Ladies and Gentlemen of the JEWry……;)

  22. Then he’d yell,
    “Allah Kharzan!!”
    and disappear in a puff of something nazi nasty.

  23. Are we all guilty of a CONSPIRACY to mock Allan ?

  24. In 2001, the taliban implemented an anti-opium policy in Afghanistan. The result was a collapse in the production of opium:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/24/world/at-heroin-s-source-taliban-do-what-just-say-no-could-not.html

    But American narcotics officials who visited the country confirmed earlier United Nations reports that the Taliban had, in one growing season, managed a rare triumph in the long and losing war on drugs. And they did it without the usual multimillion-dollar aid packages that finance police raids, aerial surveillance and crop subsidies for farmers.

  25. Allan

    You’ve said the 925 before and I have agreed with you before.

    The Taliban did suppress drug production.

    But they did a 180 after the US invasion. They now tax opium production and transport.

    This isn’t news.

  26. Allan,
    Live long and prosper Jock!
    Why does everything
    and I mean everything, have to have a hidden meaning/agenda/plan/conspiracy?

    It must take you a week to read the daily paper….

  27. Since the arrival of US-military Inc. and its various ‘agencies’, the opium crop has increased to 30 – 50 times that in 2001. Now, a record crop is expected and this is when British and American troops and helicopters have had access and airborne surveillance of the entire opium-growing region. It was never intended to eradicate or even reduce the opium crop otherwise it would have been done.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/15/afghanistan-expectations-record-opium-crop

    Twelve years after the fall of the Taliban, Afghanistan is heading for a near-record opium crop as instability pushes up the amount of land planted with illegal but lucrative poppies, according to a bleak UN report.

    The rapid growth of poppy farming as western troops head home reflects particularly badly on Britain, which was designated “lead nation” for counter-narcotics work over a decade ago.

    So it is a simple fact that opium production has soared in the presence of the US/UK military. It is fact that the US/UK militaries have the means to eradicate the opium crop, said implementation would oblige Afghan farmers to plant other crops. We see that the money has ended up in the hands of the CIA as I’m assuming that the suitcases of cash didn’t come directly from Washington.

  28. Eh?

    “If the CIA was funded by drugs, then my tax bill would not be so high.”

    The CIA’s involvement in drugs is pretty extensive. That’s the great wiki, by the way, which includes the wonderful lines:

    The CIA, which was then directed by future president George H. W. Bush, provided Noriega with hundreds of thousands of dollars per year as payment for his work in Latin America. However, when CIA pilot Eugene Hasenfus was shot down over Nicaragua by the Sandinistas, documents aboard the plane revealed many of the CIA’s activities in Latin America, and the CIA’s connections with Noriega became a public relations “liability” for the U.S. government, which finally allowed the DEA to indict him for drug trafficking, after decades of allowing his drug operations to proceed unchecked.

  29. Pete

    Your quote does not back up what Allan said.

  30. The ‘discussions’ which the US agencies have had with the taliban will concern the continued production of opium and the division of the revenues. The CIA will be wanting its share and its private contractors will remain in Afghanistan long after these dupes have gone:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/are-american-troops-protecting-afghan-opium/5309922

  31. There will always be a darks side to foreign policy endeavors. At times such efforts are necessary and even righteous, other times criminal. Often what once seemed necessary becomes in the light of experience as foolish, cynical and misguided.

    I think the continued payments to this tribal thief will be deemed misguided at best.

  32. http://www.globalresearch.ca/narco-aggression-russia-accuses-the-u-s-military-of-involvement-in-drug-trafficking-out-of-afghanistan/8180

    The report above is by AFP:

    A Russian news channel reported that drugs from Afghanistan were hauled by American transport aircraft to the U.S. airbases in Kyrgyzstan and Turkey.

    Now Russia has joined the fray accusing the U.S. military of involvement in the heroin trafficking from Afghanistan to Europe. The Vesti channel’s report from Afghanistan said that drugs from Afghanistan were hauled by American transport aircraft to the U.S. airbases Ganci in Kyrgyzstan and Incirlik in Turkey.

    U.S. freelance writer Dave Gibson recalled in an article published in American Chronicle in December what a U.S. foreign intelligence official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told NewsMax.com in March 2002 of the CIA’s record of involvement with the international drug trade. The official said: “The CIA did almost the identical thing during the Vietnam War, which had catastrophic consequences – the increase in the heroin trade in the USA beginning in the 1970s is directly attributable to the CIA. The CIA has been complicit in the global drug trade for years, so I guess they just want to carry on their favourite business.”

  33. The Russian news channel….

  34. Allan never heard of this channel before today. He doesn’t know the name of one reporter who works for it.

    But he’s sure they’re 100% right on this one as they confirm the prejudices that he already had.

  35. Phantom – a prejudice? I have a prejudice that the CIA is running Afghan drugs? My original ‘prejudice’ was to have been in favour of the Iraq invasion and the Afghan overthrow but I since found that I was duped just as much as British and American soldiers – so I changed my mind in light of the facts and weight of other evidence.

    Let’s look at the facts:

    1. in 2001 the taliban effectively ended opium production in Afghanistan by forcing it down to under 200 tons (see link at 9.25pm to a report in the NYT – a Phantom-approved outlet)
    2. In 2002, after the overthrow of the taliban and the entry of US/UK forces into Afghanistan, the crop increased 30x in that one year
    3. Since 2002, the crop has been consistently high and is now about to break its 2005 record (see link at 9.37pm to The Guardian, a Phantom-approved outlet)
    4. The revenues from the drug crop have been used by the CIA to bribe the Afghan government.
    5. In spite of total air control and access to the entire country, the US/UK forces have refused to implement a policy of opium eradication even though such a policy could not fail to achieve its purpose.

    The following are reasonable interpolations based on the facts stated above:
    1. the CIA controls the Afghan drug trade
    2. the military is used for the export of heroin to the US and western Europe

    Now does anybody wish to discuss these points or are infantile quips the limit of your debating abilities? The

  36. Well think we can at least agree the free flow of opium makes its way to Aberdeen.