Op-Ed Columnist

The President Surrenders

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: July 31, 2011

A deal to raise the federal debt ceiling is in the works. If it goes through, many commentators will declare that disaster was avoided. But they will be wrong.

For the deal itself, given the available information, is a disaster, and not just for President Obama and his party. It will damage an already depressed economy; it will probably make America’s long-run deficit problem worse, not better; and most important, by demonstrating that raw extortion works and carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road to banana-republic status.
Start with the economics. We currently have a deeply depressed economy. We will almost certainly continue to have a depressed economy all through next year. And we will probably have a depressed economy through 2013 as well, if not beyond.

The worst thing you can do in these circumstances is slash government spending, since that will depress the economy even further. Pay no attention to those who invoke the confidence fairy, claiming that tough action on the budget will reassure businesses and consumers, leading them to spend more. It doesn’t work that way, a fact confirmed by many studies of the historical record.
Indeed, slashing spending while the economy is depressed won’t even help the budget situation much, and might well make it worse. On one side, interest rates on federal borrowing are currently very low, so spending cuts now will do little to reduce future interest costs. On the other side, making the economy weaker now will also hurt its long-run prospects, which will in turn reduce future revenue. So those demanding spending cuts now are like medieval doctors who treated the sick by bleeding them, and thereby made them even sicker.

And then there are the reported terms of the deal, which amount to an abject surrender on the part of the president. First, there will be big spending cuts, with no increase in revenue. Then a panel will make recommendations for further deficit reduction — and if these recommendations aren’t accepted, there will be more spending cuts.
Republicans will supposedly have an incentive to make concessions the next time around, because defense spending will be among the areas cut. But the G.O.P. has just demonstrated its willingness to risk financial collapse unless it gets everything its most extreme members want. Why expect it to be more reasonable in the next round?
In fact, Republicans will surely be emboldened by the way Mr. Obama keeps folding in the face of their threats. He surrendered last December, extending all the Bush tax cuts; he surrendered in the spring when they threatened to shut down the government; and he has now surrendered on a grand scale to raw extortion over the debt ceiling. Maybe it’s just me, but I see a pattern here.
Did the president have any alternative this time around? Yes.

First of all, he could and should have demanded an increase in the debt ceiling back in December. When asked why he didn’t, he replied that he was sure that Republicans would act responsibly. Great call.
And even now, the Obama administration could have resorted to legal maneuvering to sidestep the debt ceiling, using any of several options. In ordinary circumstances, this might have been an extreme step. But faced with the reality of what is happening, namely raw extortion on the part of a party that, after all, only controls one house of Congress, it would have been totally justifiable.
At the very least, Mr. Obama could have used the possibility of a legal end run to strengthen his bargaining position. Instead, however, he ruled all such options out from the beginning.
But wouldn’t taking a tough stance have worried markets? Probably not. In fact, if I were an investor I would be reassured, not dismayed, by a demonstration that the president is willing and able to stand up to blackmail on the part of right-wing extremists. Instead, he has chosen to demonstrate the opposite.
Make no mistake about it, what we’re witnessing here is a catastrophe on multiple levels.
It is, of course, a political catastrophe for Democrats, who just a few weeks ago seemed to have Republicans on the run over their plan to dismantle Medicare; now Mr. Obama has thrown all that away. And the damage isn’t over: there will be more choke points where Republicans can threaten to create a crisis unless the president surrenders, and they can now act with the confident expectation that he will.

In the long run, however, Democrats won’t be the only losers. What Republicans have just gotten away with calls our whole system of government into question. After all, how can American democracy work if whichever party is most prepared to be ruthless, to threaten the nation’s economic security, gets to dictate policy? And the answer is, maybe it can’t.

Banksters & Macrosicarios

Money Still Owed In Federal Bailout: $1.5 Trillion Still Owed to Treasury, Federal Reserve

Submitted by Mary Bottari on August 3, 2011 - 12:24

A new study released today by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) shows that, despite rosy statements about the bailout's impending successful conclusion from federal government officials, $1.5 trillion of the $4.8 trillion in federal bailout funds are still outstanding.
The analysis, presented in charts and an online table and program profiles, is based entirely on government records. This comprehensive assessment of the bailout goes beyond the relatively small Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) program to look at the rest of the Treasury and Federal Reserve’s multi-trillion dollar response to the financial crisis. It shows that while the TARP bailout of Wall Street (not including the bailout of the auto industry) amounted to $330 billion, the government also quietly spent $4.4 trillion more in efforts to stave off the collapse of the financial and mortgage lending sectors. The majority of these funds ($3.9 trillion) came from the Federal Reserve, which undertook the actions citing an obscure section of its charter

“In order to understand the big picture on the bailout, you have to look beyond TARP and examine the trillions the Federal Reserve has disbursed to keep the big banks above water. $4.8 trillion went out the door to aid financial companies and repair the damage they caused to financial markets, and $1.5 trillion of that is still outstanding,” said Mary Bottari, director of CMD’s Real Economy Project.
TOTAL WALL STREET BAILOUT COST TABLE: You can click here to see our a full list of each bailout program, the amount of money disbursed and the amount of money outstanding in each program.
Most of the bailout funds were comprised of aid to banks – the peak outstanding amount was $2.2 trillion in January 2009 – which took place at the height of the financial crisis in the form of loans with below-market interest rates and for questionable collateral to banks directly from the Treasury and Federal Reserve.

Mortgage-Backed Securities Purchases

CMD’s study also shows how the government is continuing to prop up the same banks that caused the crisis in its attempt to help the housing market. The government’s housing program – which peaked at $1.6 trillion outstanding in July 2010 – is aimed at keeping mortgage lending flowing by subsidizing deals Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac make with the banks. Treasury and the Federal Reserve’s main approach has been to buy more than a trillion dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so that the two government-sponsored enterprises can continue to purchase and bundle mortgages from the banks, which they sell to Fannie and Freddie at a profit. The banks also benefit from the hundreds of billions in direct loans the government has made to Fannie and Freddie, which the GSEs then turn around and make in insurance pay-outs to banks for mortgages that have gone bad.
This massive effort is in stark contrast to the mere $2 billion the Treasury has spent to directly help homeowners stay in their homes via the widely criticized Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP) program. With housing prices continuing to falter and the United States approaching 9.2 million foreclosure filings since the beginning of 2008, HAMP can be described as nothing less than an abject failure.
“The Federal Reserve and the Treasury have spent $1.6 trillion in a bank-shot to save the mortgage lending market by using the same financial companies that got us into this mess,” said Conor Kenny, lead author of the study. “That’s more than 800 times what they’ve spent directly to keep homeowners in their houses, and the banks have made money off the whole thing.”
CMD’s analysis also shows how the $4.8 trillion bailout of the financial sector dwarfs the $600 billion that the Federal Reserve spent on the much-hyped “Quantitative Easing 2” of 2010-2011 that was intended to help the broader economy – not just the financial sector – by lowering interest rates across the board and preventing deflation.

Deuda Soberana

La deuda soberana

Gral ROBERTO BADILLO MARTÍNEZ

Jefe de Inteligencia Militar

En mi libro El complejo militar de los Estados Unidos de 2010, editado por Miguel Ángel Porrúa y presentado en noviembre de ese año en el Campo Militar Marte, en el D.F., en la página 160 explico cómo se desarrolló la crisis de las hipotecas del 2007 en los USA que afectó a la México, más que a ningún otro país en América, al caer el PIB, en un 7.5 por ciento, y después al continente europeo, como consecuencia de que los banqueros (ingleses, franceses y españoles) tenían inversiones hipotecarias.

Hoy la crisis en Europa tiene al borde la quiebra al euro. La crisis de las hipotecas lanzada por la Reserva Federal y todo el sistema bancario dependiente de esa institución contra los países del BRIC, les hizo a éstos prácticamente nada, pues todos ellos unos más otros menos, como lo demuestro también en mi libro, siguieron creciendo. El crecimiento del BRIC, le permitió a Latinoamérica, que ha vendido todo lo que produce a esos países, no caer en la crisis como recurrentemente había pasado en la época de los 70, 80 y 90 del siglo pasado, con lo efectos tequila, samba y tango y las alteraciones en los precios del petróleo. Todos ellos manipulados por los banqueros y el gobierno de Estados Unidos para apoderarse de los recursos de los pueblos, y poner a gobiernos de rodillas para aceptar el neoliberalismo.

La crisis de las hipotecas 2007 aún no termina y se ha extendido porque falló en su objetivo: afectar, detener y descarrilar a Brasil, Rusia, India y China, el ya famoso BRIC. Al no lograrlo, los banqueros obligaron al gobierno de Barack Obama a aceptar un nuevo préstamo por 600 mil millones de dólares, que aunado al de 700 mil millones de dólares hecho al gobierno de Bush por la Reserva Federal, hacen que estos banqueros privados tengan a su propio gobierno bien atornillado. con una deuda de mas de tres billones de dólares, siendo junto con China, los mayores acreedores de deuda de Estados Unidos.

Y bien, supuestamente esa inversión del gobierno estadounidense utilizada en rescates bancarios, apoyo a las grandes empresas hipotecarias, y apoyo temporal a los consumidores, así como ayuda a los tenedores de hipotecas, no sirvió de nada. La economía de Estados Unidos no se reactivó y su deuda total de 14 billones de dólares lo hace prácticamente un país en bancarrota. El desempleo ha aumentado, inclusive.

Lógicamente, esto no estaba en el guión cinematográfico de la Reserva Federal que preparó la crisis de la hipotecas para derrumbar al BRIC. El derrumbe lo veían como masas del campo en India, China y Brasil saliendo a protestar por la caída de su economía.
Masas de rusos en las estepas y grandes ciudades protestando contra su gobierno. Caos total en su economía. Nada de esto ocurrió y esto es histórico, y de esta crisis, desatada en su propio país por los banqueros de la Reserva Federal, sus cómplices y aliados en EU y en el mundo, cosecharían los grandes beneficios en miles de millones de dólares de ganancias por salvar empresas quebradas chinas, hindúes, rusas y brasileñas; dólares que ellos imprimen sin parar nunca su maquinita.

Las grandes compañías hipotecarias de Estados Unidos son Fannie Mac y Freddie Mac; de esta compañía fue director Rahm Emmanuel, del grupo sigiloso, organizado, sutil, vigilante, completo y penetrante, ex soldado del ejercito de Israel, que pudo desde su cargo preparar la crisis de las hipotecas, haciendo perder a millones de estadounidenses sus viviendas y el dinero aportado como pago de las mismas. La forma en que se llevó al cabo la crisis, hasta el presente, pues sigue y seguirá por varios años, en Estados
Unidos, con solo observar su desarrollo se da cuenta cualquier persona de cómo los banqueros de la FED se mueven para ocultar la verdad, para tergiversarla, para revolverlo todo, para lanzar amenazas a culpables que no se cumplen, (sólo Bernard Maddof y Stanford fueron chivos expiatorios y todos los demás recogen las ganancias que en las crisis los pueblos pierden.)

El libro El Complejo Militar Industrial de los USA está cerrado desde el punto de vista de la información hasta el día ultimo de enero del 2010. En esta época Rahm Emmanuel es el principal asesor del presidente Barack Obama, y su equipo económico incluía justo los necesarios del equipo sigiloso y penetrante, para detener cualquier verdadera reforma como la de Ron Paul, congresista de Texas, cuya iniciativa propondría a auditar a la Reserva Federal en forma independiente.

Dicho equipo, que está fotografiado en mi libro en la página 154, incluye personajes que han pertenecido alternativamente a la Reserva Federal o al gobierno de Estados Unidos durante mas de 40 años, como Laurence Summers y Paul Volker. Más otros identificados con el grupo sigiloso, penetrante y sutil. Cumplieron con su objetivo: detener las verdaderas reformas en el Congreso que afectaban a la reserva federal como la de Ron Paul. Cumplido su designio se fueron a otros cargos, a universidades o a instituciones privadas.

Por su parte el súper asesor de Barack Obama, Emmanuel, cumplido su cometido de ser uno de los desatadores de la crisis, se fue de presidente municipal a Chicago.

Por lo tanto, en julio de 2011 podemos decir con certeza, que al no afectar al BRIC la crisis de las hipotecas se siguió estirando a fin de afectar en el mundo a quien se deje.  Latinoamérica, apoyada por sus ventas a China hasta ahora ha resistido.

Europa en cambio ha sido gravemente afectada principalmente en algunos países como Islandia, Portugal y Grecia, poniendo en peligro incluso la permanencia del euro como moneda de Europa.

No debemos olvidar que banqueros y capitalistas, son aliados entre si, hasta que uno u otro puede terminar con el de enfrente. Los países europeos afectados hasta ahora, tendrán que esperar 20 o 30 años para terminar esta crisis.

A mediados de julio del 2011 la lucha entre el Congreso de los Estados Unidos, el presidente Obama y los banqueros de la Reserva Federal tiene al mundo al borde del infarto porque no se ponen de acuerdo en cómo resolver el problema de la deuda de Estados Unidos. Soóo tienen hasta el ultimo día de julio para decidir si aumenta su deuda, pidiendo nada menos que dos billones de dólares más a la Reserva Federal que es la propuesta de los banqueros. Esta no es solución ni de corto ni de mediano, ni largo plazo.

La cuestión es muy simple: La deuda actual de Estados Unidos es de aproximadamente 14 billones de dólares. Esto equivale a 42 veces el presupuesto de México para atender administrativamente en un año a 112 millones de mexicanos. La deuda de Estados Unidos es la mas grande del mundo, aunque por PIB Japón e Italia lo superan.

De esos 14 billones, Estados Unidos le debe a la Reserva Federal tres billones de dólares y a China, que le ha pedido responsabilidad con su deuda, dos billones de dólares, y a otros países y bancos distintos el resto.

Las reuniones entre el presidente y los congresistas de los últimos días no han tenido resultado. Hay incluso un senador que propone se otorgue el a Obama la facultad de aumentar el techo de deuda. O sea, cercanas las elecciones lo que quieren es responsabilizar al presidente de Estados Unidos de aumentar la deuda a fin de que se vea afectado su partido en las elecciones.

Lo que la Reserva Federal desea es que el Presidente o el Congreso autoricen la ampliación de la deuda soberana de Estados Unidos a fin de ser ellos los que con su maquinita que nunca se detiene de hacer dólares, le presten los dos billones de dólares.

En mi libro El complejo militar industrial de Estados Unidos, expongo que las casas calificadoras de países, empresas e instituciones, que han descarrilado al euro en los últimos dos años, y han afectado gravemente a diversos países de la Unión Europea afectando esencialmente los intereses del pago de sus deudas, con sus calificaciones, sin duda responden a los mismos intereses de la Reserva Federal. Una calificación hacia abajo de la deuda soberana de cualquier país hace que los intereses de su deuda suban, en relación con el bono alemán que es la referencia en Europa para señalar los intereses de la deuda de los demás países. Ello porque Alemania es la economía mas fuerte de la Unión Europea.

Actualmente, a mediados de julio del 2011 Irlanda paga el 14 por ciento de intereses por sus bonos, casi 11 puntos mas que Alemania. Grecia paga el 16 por ciento y Portugal el 12 por ciento más que los bonos alemanes. Los pagos de intereses de estos países son derivados de la prima de riesgo que cada país asume de acuerdo a su deuda soberana y que se deducen del diferencial de pago de la deuda alemana. Esto representa una sangría para los países que pagan este tipo de intereses y sobre todo se ven sujetos a desarrollar políticas en contra de sus pueblos porque así lo exigen los mercados. Si no cumplen con sus instrucciones, las casas calificadoras los siguen calificando a la baja y los países se hunden, yendo a la bancarrota como Islandia en años pasados.

Las protestas de banqueros y lideres de la Unión Europea incluyendo dirigentes políticos contra las casas calificadoras, son hipócritas y desleales a sus pueblos, pues ellos son, como bien lo digo en el libro, cómplices o aliados del sistema explotador de la Reserva Federal de Estados Unidos, la mayor mafia del mundo.

Finalmente, debemos aclarar que la revista Forbes, ingenuamente nos quiere engañar y  publica que Carlos Slim es el hombre más rico del mundo con sus 50 mil millones de dólares. Esto es absolutamente falso. Siendo esta revista una de las miles de publicaciones que forman el entramado de los banqueros de la Reserva Federal en el mundo, desea esconder con sus trabajos anuales sobre los hombres más ricos del mundo a los usureros banqueros de la Reserva Federal, que controlan directamente los doce bancos de la Reserva Federal de Estados Unidos, y cuyas cuentas en dólares se expresan en billones y se dan el lujo de tener bajo su control con sus préstamos usureros al gobierno de Estados Unidos.

General de división DEM retirado*

*robertobadillomartí nez@hotmail.com

Destabilizing Mexico

As reverse migration rocks Mexico, drug and violence have engulfed the entire country, inundating cities along the U.S.-Mexico border. The newest murderous offensive raises concerns about the ability of the Mexican government to protect its citizens and to regain control of the streets. As a result, the United States will be coming to the rescue. Barack Obama has announced that he is considering the deployment of National Guard troops to contain the violence. Ironically, most of the drugs that enter the United States from Mexico, have been funneled to the Mexican drug lords through CIA rendition flights from Columbia and Afghanistan. Could there possibly be a connection between U.S. global policies and the destabilization of Mexico?

y Richard Skaff
Attorney General Eric Holder stated on February 25, 2009 that Mexican drug cartels pose a national security threat, and issued a direct warning to these cartels that they will be destroyed.
The warning came as the attorney general and acting Drug Enforcement Administration chief Michele Leonhart announced the completion of the final phase of DEA’s "Operation Xcellerator," which targeted the Sinaloa cartel, a major western Mexico drug operation that has been expanding its reach into the United States . [1].
Meanwhile, the blood shed in the Mexican cities continues to be extensive and has expanded its tentacles of violence to various cities in Mexico. Lawlessness, corruption, murders, decapitations, and kidnappings have taken the Mexican cities by a storm, giving rise to a new radical group calling itself the Juarez Citizens Command that is threatening to strike back against lawlessness that has gripped Mexico for a long time. The group stated that they are going to strike back by killing one criminal a day until order and peace is restored. Similar groups are popping up all across Mexico. [2].
In its last report, the US Department of justice disclosed that 17.2 billion dollars in cash entered Mexico in only the past two years as a result of money laundering operation in their country. The report advised that Mexico and Colombia are the principal destinations of narco resources that operate in the US and that “the laundering of drug money is a global industry” with transnational organizations present in various countries. [2].
According to a DEA undercover operative, the Mexican drug cartels have gained more and more of the American market. They have grown bolder in their attempts to expand their operations in Mexico and the United States . They now control the ruling party in Mexico and operate the biggest drug business on earth right here in the USA . [2].
Mexico’s drug and violence problem now engulfs the entire country, inundating cities along the U.S.-Mexico border. The robust drug cartel reduced its position in the western mountains, and lunged into the heart of national power in Mexico City. The capital that was once relatively immune to such contemptuous boldness of drug killings has become the scene of multiple assassinations of high-ranking federal police officials in about a week. More than 1,000 people have been killed in Mexico this year in drug-related violence and about 6,290 in 2008. [11].

Mexican police and soldiers are battling a wave of drug-related violence across the country, particularly in northern areas bordering the US . The Mexican Federal Government launched a campaign against drug-related violence more than two years ago involving the deployment of around 36,000 troops across the country.
The situation in Mexico has become so dire and out of control that U.S. Defense secretary Gates stated on March 01, 2009 that the US is in the position to provide more help to Mexico in the fight against drug cartels operating near the U.S. border. [4].
Not surprisingly, the violence has over-spilled into the United States . Brian Ross of ABC news reported that Phoenix Arizona has become the kidnapping capital of America , with more incidents than any other city in the world outside of Mexico City , and over 370 cases in 2008 alone. Phoenix police Chief Andy Anderson told ABC news that if the situation doesn’t stop here and is not turned around, it will spread across the nation. Another law enforcement officer compared the Arizona border to that of Pakistan . [5].
Apparently, Mexico is in a losing battle with drug cartels whose escalating violence is providing cover for Marxist insurgents to become active. The newest cartel murderous offensive raises troubling questions about the ability of the Mexican government to provide safety and security for its citizens, and heralds a future of bloody anarchy if officials cannot regain control of the streets. As a result, the United will be coming to the rescue. President Obama recently announced that he was looking at possibly deploying National Guard troops to contain the violence but ruled out immediate military force. [6].
Ironically, while we are beating the drums of national security and intervention, the Associated reported on March 13, 2009 that Forbes magazine ranked Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, Mexico’s most violent drug cartels on its list of billionaires, with an estimated $1 billion fortune, at No. 701, between a Swiss oil-trading tycoon and an American chemical heir. Guzman , Mexico ’s most-wanted fugitive, is believed to head the Sinaloa cartel. President Felipe Calderon said Thursday that "magazines are not only attacking and lying about the situation in Mexico but are also praising criminals." [8].
Analysis:
Who benefits from the destabilization of Mexico?
KNX News radio station a subsidiary of Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) reported this week that most of the guns that land in the hands of the drug cartel allegedly came from the black market in the United States . Ironically, most of the drugs that enter the United States from Mexico , have been funneled to the Mexican drug lords through rendition flights from Columbia (cocaine) and Afghanistan (opium) to Mexico , then, rerouted to the US through the Mexican drug lords. Per example, On September 24, 2007, a Florida based Gulfstream II jet aircraft, number N987SA, crashed in the Yucatan . As it turns out, not only was the plane used on at least three CIA rendition flights from Europe and the United States to the Guantánamo torture chamber, but it was loaded with tons of cocaine when it went down. El Nuevo Herald reported that the CIA plane was loaded up with 3.3 tons of coke in Medellín, Colombia, and was used to ferry “hundreds of delinquents,” including alleged members of the Taliban, to Cuba for water boarding and other specialties. [10].
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oszATUJ4IRE&feature=player_embedded
Historically, most of the illegal activities especially in drugs and human trafficking, originate in the poorer and the less developed areas of the world, then, moves across borders to rich, developed country markets. In order for this process to take place, criminal organizations are fostered, subsidized, and protected by high level government officials, in order to launder money throughout the international banking systems and to increase the global cash flow. The IMF has reported in 2003, that 1.5 trillion US dollars a year is laundered through banks, where 500 to 600 billion dollars of that money is from drug trade and the aggregate size of money laundering in the world could be somewhere between 2 to 5 percent of the world’s GDP. It has also been a well known and documented fact in the press and in congressional records that the US intelligence agencies have dealt and circulated drugs in the US and abroad for many years.
So, is there a connection between our global policies and the destabilization of Mexico?
It would make sense to assume that Mexico is going to become a national security risk for the United States , which in turn will justify our Samaritan military aid and intervention to help the Mexican government contain the Mexican drug cartel. Therefore, Mexico will become a safer place for transnational corporations like Chevron and Exxon-Mobil. In addition, this process will pave the way for the security and prosperity partnership to unravel, as well as the privatization of Mexico ’s oil and natural resources and their takeover by the global corporations. As a result, a massive transfer of wealth and power to the new North American Union Government will unfold.
Is the American public aware and in agreement with the SPP?
Are we going to witness more conflict within our borders due to economic woes, or contrived attacks, which in return will solidify further the iron hand of our new democratic government?
Are we going to witness another major economic collapse like the prospective commercial real estate disaster that will cause major reverberations in the stock market, will induce further impoverishment of the population, and will lead to more bailouts leading to higher inflation, new currency, and poorer standard of living?
Are we heading toward civil unrest incited by the economic woes that will lead to the balkanization of America ?
Or, are we simply going to be led like sheep to the slaughter house where we will give up our freedom to satisfy our primal needs like food, shelter, and safety, then, become totally impoverished, micro-chipped, and controlled, and finally be forced into accepting the new global order?
References
1. ABC News, February 25, 2009. Holder Vows ’Cartels Will Be Destroyed’ Operation Targeted the Sinaloa Cartel; Highlights Spread of Drug Gang Violence
2. The American Chronicle, January 20, 2009, The Revolution in Mexico has begun.
3. UPI, January, 21, 2009. New Juarez police chief decapitated after 4 days.
4. Associated press, 03-01-09, Gates says military can help Mexico in drug war.
5. AFP, March 2-9, 2009, Issue 9/10. Arizona as dangerous as “ Pakistan ,” say top phoenix cop.
6. McClatchy Newspapers, March 12, 2009. Obama: Troop move to Mexican Border under consideration.
7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oszATUJ4IRE
8. Associated Press, March 13, 2009. Mexican Drug Lord makes Forbes Billionaire list.
9. KNX News, (1070), March 11, 2009.
10. El Nuevo Herald, 11-29-2007 04:37 PM. Avión usado por la CIA y la DEA traficaba drogas
11. Associated Press, march 9, 2009. Obama discusses U.S. military assistance to Mexico for drug war.

Drug Wars and Genocide

Much has been written about the Mexican war on drugs and its "house of horrors", of the efforts by the Washington-backed Mexican government to combat the savage struggle among rival drug cartels for control over the lucrative trade. But, as James Petras clearly brings out, no one is seriously interested in making the problem go away. Suffice it to say that in times of deep crises the very survival of the US financial system – and through it, the world banking system – is linked to the liquidity generated by the drug “industry”.

n May 2011, Mexican investigators uncovered another mass clandestine grave with dozens of mutilated corpses; bringing the total number of victims to 40,000 killed since 2006 when the Calderon regime announced its "war on drug traffickers". Backed by advisers, agents and arms, the White House has been the principal promotor of a ’war’ that has totally decimated Mexico’s society and economy.
If Washington has been the driving force for the regime’s war, Wall Street banks have been the main instruments ensuring the profits of the drug cartels. Every major US bank has been deeply involved in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in drug profits, for the better part of the past decade.
Mexico’s descent into this inferno has been engineered by the leading US financial and political institutions, each supporting ‘one side or the other’ in the bloody “total war” which spares no one, no place and no moment in time. While the Pentagon arms the Mexican government and the US Drug Enforcement Agency enforces the “military solution”, the biggest US banks receive, launder and transfer hundreds of billions of dollars to the drug lords’ accounts, who then buy modern arms, pay private armies of assassins and corrupt untold numbers of political and law enforcement officials on both sides of the border.
Mexico’s Descent in the Inferno
Everyday scores, if not hundreds, of corpses – appear in streets and or are found in unmarked graves; dozens are murdered in their homes, cars, public transport, offices and even hospitals; known and unknown victims in the hundreds are kidnapped and disappear; school children, parents, teachers, doctors and businesspeople are seized in broad daylight and held for ransom or murdered in retaliation. Thousands of migrant workers are kidnapped, robbed, ransomed, murdered and evidence is emerging that some are sold into the illegal ‘organ trade’. The police are barricaded in their commissaries; the military, if and when it arrives, takes out its frustration on entire cities, shooting more civilians than cartel soldiers. Everyday life revolves around surviving the daily death toll; threats are everywhere, the armed gangs and military patrols fire and kill with virtual impunity. People live in fear and anger.
The Free Trade Agreement: The Sparks that lit the Inferno
In the late 1980’s, Mexico was in crisis, but the people chose a legal way out: they elected a President, Cuahtemoc Cardenas, on the basis of his national program to promote the economic revitalization of agriculture and industry. The Mexican elite, led by Carlos Salinas of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) chose otherwise and subverted the election: The electorate was denied its victory; the peaceful mass protests were ignored. Salinas and subsequent Mexican presidents vigorously pursued a free trade agreement (NAFTA) with the US and Canada, which rapidly drove millions of Mexican farmers, ranchers and small business people into bankruptcy. Devastation led to the flight of millions of immigrant workers. Rural movements of debtors flourished and ebbed, were co-opted or repressed. The misery of the legal economy contrasted with the burgeoning wealth of the traffickers of drugs and people, which generated a growing demand for well-paid armed auxiliaries as soldiers for the cartels. The regional drug syndicates emerged out of the local affluence.
In the new millennium, popular movements and a new electoral hope arose: Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO). By 2006 a vast peaceful electoral movement promised substantial social and economic reforms to ‘integrate millions of disaffected youth’. In the parallel economy, the drug cartels were expanding and benefiting from the misery of millions of workers and peasants marginalized by the Mexican elite, who had plundered the public treasury, speculated in real estate, robbed the oil industry and created enormous privatized monopolies in the communication and banking sectors.
In 2006, millions of Mexican voters were once again denied their electoral victory: The last best hope for a peaceful transformation was dashed. Backed by the US Administration, Felipe Calderon stole the election and proceeded to launch the “War on Drug Traffickers” strategy dictated by Washington.

The War Strategy Escalates the Drug War: The Banking Crises Deepens the Ties with Drug Traffickers
The massive escalation of homicides and violence in Mexico began with the declaration of a war on the drug cartels by the fraudulently elected President Calderon, a policy pushed initially by the Bush Administration and subsequently strongly backed by the Obama – Clinton regime. Over 40,000 Mexican soldiers filled the streets, towns and barrios – violently assaulting citizens - especially young people. The cartels retaliated by escalating their armed assaults on police. The war spread to all the major cities and along the major highways and rural roads; murders multiplied and Mexico descended further into a Dantesque inferno. Meanwhile, the Obama regime ‘reaffirmed’ its support for a militarist solution on both sides of the border: Over 500,000 Mexican immigrants were seized and expelled from the US; heavily armed border patrols multiplied. Cross border gun sales grew exponentially. The US “market” for Mexican manufactured goods and agricultural products shrank, further widening the pool for cartel recruits while the supply of high powered weapons increased. White House gun and drug policies strengthened both sides in this maniacal murderous cycle: The US government armed the Calderon regime and the American gun manufacturers sold guns to the cartels through both legal and underground arms sales. Steady or increasing demand for drugs in the US – and the grotesque profits derived from trafficking and sales--- remained the primary driving force behind the tidal wave of violence and societal disintegration in Mexico.
Drug profits, in the most basic sense, are secured through the ability of the cartels to launder and transfer billions of dollars through the US banking system. The scale and scope of the US banking-drug cartel alliance surpasses any other economic activity of the US private banking system. According to US Justice Department records, one bank alone, Wachovia Bank (now owned by Wells Fargo), laundered $378.3 billion dollars between May 1, 2004 and May 31, 2007 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Every major bank in the US has served as an active financial partner of the murderous drug cartels – including Bank of America, Citibank, and JP Morgan, as well as overseas banks operating out of New York, Miami and Los Angeles, as well as London.
While the White House pays the Mexican state and army to kill Mexicans suspected of drug trafficking, the US Justice Department belatedly slaps a relatively small fine on the major US financial accomplice to the murderous drug trade, Wachovia Bank, spares its bank officials from any jail time and allows major cases to lapse into dismissal.
The major agency of the US Treasury involved in investigating money laundering, the Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, deliberately ignored the blatant collaboration of US banks with drug terrorists, concentrating almost their entire staff and resources on enforcing sanctions against Iran. For seven years, Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey used his power as head of the Department for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence to pursue Israel’s phony “war on terrorism” against Iran, rather than shut down Wachovia’s money-laundering operations with the Mexican drug terrorists. In this period of time an estimated 40,000 Mexican civilian have been killed by the cartels and the army.
Without US arms and financial services supporting both the illegitimate Mexican regimes and the drug cartels – there could be no “drug war”, no mass killings and no state terror. The simple acts of stopping the flood of cheap subsidized US agriculture products into Mexico and de-criminalizing the use and purchase of cocaine in the US would dry up the pool of ‘cartel soldiers’ from the bankrupted Mexican peasantry and the cut back the profits and demand for illegal drugs in the US market.
The Drug Traffickers, the Banks and the White House
If the major US banks are the financial engines which allow the billion dollar drug empires to operate, the White House, the US Congress and the law enforcement agencies are the basic protectors of these banks. Despite the deep and pervasive involvement of the major banks in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in illicit funds, the “court settlements” pursued by US prosecutors have led to no jail time for the bankers. One court’s settlement amounted to a fine of $50 million dollars, less than 0.5% of one of the banks (the Wachovia/Wells Fargo bank) $12.3 billion profits for 2009 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Despite the death of tens of thousands of Mexican civilians, US executive branch directed the DEA, the federal prosecutors and judges to impose such a laughable ‘punishment’ on Wachovia for its illegal services to the drug cartels. The most prominent economic officials of the Bush and Obama regimes, including Summers, Paulson, Geithner, Greenspan, Bernacke et al, are all long term associates, advisers and members of the leading financial houses and banks implicated in laundering the billions of drug profits.
Laundering drug money is one of the most lucrative sources of profit for Wall Street; the banks charge hefty commissions on the transfer of drug profits, which they then lend to borrowing institutions at interest rates far above what – if any – they pay to drug trafficker depositors. Awash in sanitized drug profits, these US titans of the finance world can easily buy their own elected officials to perpetuate the system.
Even more important and less obvious is the role of drug money in the recent financial meltdown, especially during its most critical first few weeks.
According to the head of United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, “In many instances, drug money (was)… currently the only liquid investment capital…. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor…interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities… (there were) signs that some banks were rescued in that way.” (Reuters, January 25,2009. US edition). Capital flows from the drug billionaires were key to floating Wachovia and other leading banks. In a word: the drug billionaires saved the capitalist financial system from collapse!
Conclusion
By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, it has become clear that capital accumulation, at least in North America, is intimately linked to generalized violence and drug trafficking. Because capital accumulation is dependent on financial capital, and the latter is dependent on the industry profits from the multi-hundred-billion dollar drug trade, the entire ensemble is embedded in the ‘total war’ over drug profits. In times of deep crises the very survival of the US financial system – and through it, the world banking system – is linked to the liquidity of the drug “industry”.
At the most superficial level the destruction of Mexican and Central American societies – encompassing over 100 million people – is a result of a conflict between drug cartels and the political regimes of the region. At a deeper level there is a multiplier or “ripple effect” related to their collaboration: the cartels draw on the support of the US banks to realize their profits; they spend hundreds of millions on the US arms industry and others to secure their supplies, transport and markets; they employ tens of thousands of recruits for their vast private armies and civilian networks and they purchase the compliance of political and military officials on both sides of the borders
For its part, the Mexican government acts as a conduit for US Pentagon/Federal police, Homeland Security, drug enforcement and political apparatuses prosecuting the ‘war’, which has put Mexican lives, property and security at risk. The White House stands at the strategic center of operations – the Mexican regime serves as the front-line executioners.
On one side of the “war on drugs” are the major Wall Street banks; on the other side, the White House and its imperial military strategists and in the ‘middle’ are 90 million Mexicans and 40,000 murder victims and counting.
Relying on political fraud to impose economic deregulation in the 1990’s (neo-liberalism), the US policies led directly to the social disintegration, criminalization and militarization of the current decade. The sophisticated narco-finance economy has now become the most advanced stage of neo-liberalism. When the respectable become criminals, the criminals become respectable.
The issue of genocide in Mexico has been determined by the empire and its “knowing” bankers and cynical rulers.
==

Related articles:
 Security and Prosperity Partnership: Militarized NAFTA, by Stephen Lendman, Laura Carlsen and Constance Fogal, Voltaire Network, 27 March 2010.
 Destabilizing Mexico, by Richard Skaff, Voltaire Network, 17 March 2009.

Norwegian Massacre

Organized Political Terrorism

The Norwegian Massacre, the State, the Media and Israel

by James Petras

The July 22, 2011, bombing of the office of the Norwegian Prime Minister, Labor Party Jen Stoltenberg, which killed 8 civilians, and the subsequent political assassination of 68 unarmed activists of the Labor Party Youth on Utoeya Island, just 20 minutes from Oslo, by militant neo-fascist Christian-Zionists, raises fundamental questions about the growing links between the legal Far-Right, the ‘mainstream media’, the Norwegian police, Israel and rightwing terrorism.

So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionist,s against all cultural Marxists/Multiculturalists”. Anders Behring Breivik’s "Manifesto"
“. . . two more cells exist in my organization”. . . Anders Behring Breivik in police custody (Reuters 7/25/11)
The mass media and the rise of rightwing terrorism
The leading English language newspapers, The New York Times (NYT), the Washington Post (WP), the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and the Financial Times (FT), as well as President Obama, blamed “Islamic extremists”, upon the first police reports of the killings, publishing a series of incendiary (and false) headlines and reports, labeling the event as ‘Norway’s 9-11’, in terms which echoed the ideological motivation and justifications cited by the Norwegian Christian-Zionist political assassin, Anders Behring Breivik himself. The July 23/24 front page of the Financial Times (of London), read “Islamist extremism fears: Worst Europe strike since 2005”. Obama immediately cited the terrorist attack in Norway to further justify his overseas wars against Muslim countries. The FT, NYT, WP and WSJ trotted out their self-styled “experts” who debated over which Arab/Islamic leaders or movements were responsible – despite Norwegian press reports of "the arrest of a Nordic man in police uniform".
Clearly, the US mass media and political elite were eager to use the bombing and assassinations to justify ongoing overseas imperial wars, ignoring the burgeoning domestic extremist rightwing organizations and violent individuals who are the outgrowth of official Islamophobic hate propaganda.
When Anders Breivik, a known neo-fascist extremist, handed his weapons over to Norwegian police without resistance and claimed credit for the bombing and massacre, the second phase of the official cover-up took place: He was immediately described as “a lone wolf assassin”, who “acted alone” (BBC July 24, 2011) or as mentally deranged, downplaying his political networks, his American, European and Israeli ideological mentors and commitments, which led to his acts of terrorism. Even more outrageous, the media and officials ignored the fact that this complex, multiphase terrorist attack was beyond the capacity of one ‘deranged’ person.
Anders Behring Breivik had been a dues-paying member of a Far-Right political party, The Progress Party and a collaborator and contributor to an overtly neo-Nazi web site. He frequently focused his hatred on the ruling Labor Party for its relative tolerance of immigrants. He despised immigrants especially, Muslims, and was an ardent Christian-Zionist supporter of Israeli repression and terror against the Palestinian people. His criminal action was political in essence and embedded in a much wider political network.
The political elite and media have scrambled to deny the overlapping links between ‘legal’ ideological Islamophobes, like the American Zionists Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, the Dutch far-right Party of Freedom led by the hate-monger Geert Wilders and their counterparts in the Norwegian Progress Party who rail against the ’Muslim threat’. The ’direct action’ terrorists take their cues from electoral parties, like the Progress Party, who recruit and indoctrinate activists, like Behring Breivik, who then leave the ‘electoral road’ to carry out their bloody carnage, allowing the ‘respectable’ hate-mongers to hypocritically condemn him… after the outrage.
The Lone Assassin: a fascist Superman travels faster than a speeding bullet versus the police moving slower than an arthritic turtle
The case for the “lone wolf terrorist” defies credence. It is a tissue of lies used to cover up state complicity, intelligence malfeasance, and the sharp right-turn in the domestic and foreign policies of NATO countries.
There is no basis to accept Breivik’s initial claim that he acted alone for several outstanding reasons:
 First, the car bomb, which devastated downtown Oslo, was a highly complex weapon requiring expertise and coordination – the kind available to state or intelligence services, like the Mossad, which specialize in devastating car bombs. Amateurs, like Breivik, with no training in explosives, usually blow themselves up or lack the skill required to connect the electronic timing devices or remote detonators (like the unsuccessful ‘shoe’, ‘underpants’ and ‘Times Square’ bombers have proved).
 Secondly, the details of (a) moving the bomb, (b) obtaining (stealing) a vehicle, (c) placing the device at the strategic site, (d) successfully detonating it and (e) then gowning up in an elaborate special police uniform with an arsenal of hundreds of rounds of ammunition and driving off in another vehicle to Utoeya Island, (f) waiting patiently while armed to the teeth for a ferry boat, g) crossing with other passengers in his police uniform, (h) rounding up the Labor youth activists and commencing the massacre of scores of unarmed youth and finally (i) finishing off the wounded and hunting for those trying to hide or swim away - is not the activity of a lone zealot. Even the combination of Superman, Einstein and a world class marksman could not perform those tasks.
The media and NATO leaders must view the public as passive morons to expect them to believe that Anders Behring Breivik “acted alone”. He is willing to take a 20 year prison sentence if it means, as he maintains, that their collective action is the spark that ignites his comrades and advances the agenda of the violent and legal far rightwing parties. Facing a Norwegian judge on July 25, he publically declared the existence of “two more cells in my organization”. According to witness testimony on Utoeya Island shots from two distinct weapons were heard from different directions during the massacre. The police say they are… “investigating”. Needless to say the police have found nothing; instead they put on a “show” to cover their inaction by raiding two houses far from the massacre and quickly released the suspects.
The most serious political implication of the terrorist action, however, is the conspicuous complicity of top police officials. The police took 90 minutes to arrive at Utoeya Island, located less than 20 kilometers from Oslo, 12 minutes by helicopter and 25 to 30 minutes by car and boat. The delay allowed the right wing assassins to use up the ammunition, maximizing the death toll of young, anti-fascist activists and devastating the Labor Youth Movement. The police chief, Sveinung Sponheim, made the feeblest excuse and cover-up, claiming “problems with transport”. Sponheim argued that a helicopter “wasn’t on standby” and they “could not find a boat” (Associated Press, July 24, 2011). Yet a helicopter was available; it managed to fly to Utoeya and film the ongoing slaughter, and over half of Norwegians, a seafaring people for millennia, own or have access to a boat. A police force, faced with what the Prime Minister calls the "worst atrocity since the Nazi occupation", moving at the pace of an arthritic turtle to rescue youth activists, raises the suspicion of some level of complicity. The obvious question arises as to the degree to which the ideology of right wing extremism – neo-fascism – has penetrated the police and security forces, especially the upper echelons? This level of “inactivity” raises more questions than it answers. What it suggests is that the Social Democrats only control part of the Government – the legislative, while the neo-fascists influence the state apparatus.
The plain fact is that the police did not save a single life. When they finally arrived, Anders Behring Breivik had run out of ammunition and surrendered turning himself over to the police. The police literally did not fire a single shot; they did not even have to hunt or capture the assassin. An almost choreographed scenario: Hundreds wounded, 68 unarmed, peaceful activists killed and the Labor youth movement decimated.
The police can claim “crime solved” while the mass media prattles about a “lone assassin”. The far right has a “martyr” to mask a further advance in their anti-Muslim, pro Israel crusade. (It is reminiscent of the celebrated Israeli-American fascist mass murderer, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who slaughtered dozens of unarmed Palestinian men and boys at prayer in 1994).
Only two days before the political murders, the head of the Labor Party Youth Movement, Eskil Pederson, gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway’s second largest tabloid, in which he announced a “unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side” (Gilad Atzmon, July 24, 2011).
The fact of the matter is that the Norwegian military has no problem promptly dispatching 500 troops to Afghanistan, half way around the world and providing six Norwegian Air Force jets and pilots to bomb and terrorize Libya. And yet they can’t find a helicopter or a row boat to transport their police a couple hundred yards to stop a domestic right wing terrorist – whose murderous rampage was being described second by second by the terrorized young victims on their cell phones to their frantic parents?
The imperial roots of domestic fascism: Conclusion
Clearly, the decisions of Norway and other Scandinavian nations to participate in the US imperial crusades against Muslim and especially Arab people in the Middle East have aroused and energized the neo-fascist right. They now want to “bring the war home”; they want Norway to go further, to "cleanse the nation" by expelling Muslims. They want to “send a message” to the Labor Party: Either it must accept a full neo-fascist pro-Israeli agenda or expect more massacres, more elected fascists, more followers of Anders Behring Breivik.
The “Progress Party” is now the second largest political party in Norway. If a “conservative” coalition defeats Labor, neo-fascists will probably sit in the Government. Who knows, after a few years of good behavior, they might find an excuse to commute their ex-comrades sentence . . . or proclaim him mentally rehabilitated and freed.
Clearly what is needed is the immediate withdrawal of all troops from imperial wars and a systematic, coherent and organized fight against domestic right-wing terrorists and their intellectual godparents, in America, Israel and Europe. Labor youth must go press on with their demand that the Labor Government, under Prime Minister Jen Stoltenberg, recognize the nation of Palestine and implement a total boycott of Israeli goods and services. A national and international political-educational campaign must be organized to expose the links between respectable electoral fascists and violent terrorists.
The Labor Youth martyrs of Utoeya Island should be cherished and their ideals taught in all the schools. Their far-right enemies and supporters whether overt, covert or directly complicit, should be exposed and condemned. The best weapon against the renewed neo-fascist onslaught is a political and educational offensive, taking up the anti-fascist, anti-Quisling (Norway’s notorious Nazi collaborator) fighting traditions of their grandparents’ era. It’s not too late – if the Labor Party, the Norwegian trade unions and the anti-fascist youth act now before the flood of resurgent fascism.

James Petras

Denuncia pacto secreto de ‘El Chapo’ y la DEA

Denuncia pacto secreto de ‘El Chapo’ y la DEA

Anabel Hernández/Reporte Índigo

02-Agosto-2011

Mientras el hijo de “El Mayo” Zambada enfrenta en EU un juicio que podría llevarlo a prisión de por vida, ante la Corte se presentó un recurso que ha dado un nuevo giro al caso. Según documentos de la defensa, se habría celebrado un pacto entre el Cártel de Sinaloa y el gobierno de E.U. para entregar información a cambio de protección, y “El Vicentillo” era parte de ese acuerdo. La defensa alega que sus acciones fueron realizadas con el permiso del gobierno norteamericano, por lo que debe ser liberado.

En la fecha límite del plazo fijado para que Vicente Zambada Niebla presentara los alegatos para librar una larga condena por delitos de conspiración y tráfico de droga, un explosivo documento llegó a la Corte Federal de Chicago.
El hijo del narcotraficante Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, uno de los líderes del Cártel de Sinaloa, reveló a la Corte Federal de Distrito para el Distrito Norte de Illinois que la organización criminal mexicana tiene desde 1998 un acuerdo de inmunidad en Estados Unidos a cambio de proporcionar información de los cárteles enemigos.
En documentos entregados a la Corte el pasado 29 de julio, de los cuales Reporte Indigo tiene copia, el hijo de “El Mayo” afirmó que el enlace entre la agencia antidrogas DEA y el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) es el casi desconocido narcotraficante Humberto Loya, quien es “asesor y confidente” de “El Mayo” y Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán Loera.

“El señor Zambada Niebla fue parte de ese arreglo entre el gobierno de Estados Unidos, a través de sus oficiales (DEA y ICE), y el Cártel de Sinaloa, a través de Loya. El acusado proporcionó información que Loya transmitió al gobierno (de EU)”, se afirma en uno de los documentos presentados ante la Corte por la defensa del narcojunior.
Con base en ese argumento, Vicente Zambada Niebla afirma que el gobierno de EU no puede juzgarlo y debe ponerlo en libertad porque él también gozaba de inmunidad gracias a la “valiosa” información que ofrecía.
La DEA y el ICE también están involucrados en el caso de tráfico de armas a México conocido como “Rápido y Furioso”.
Con el pretexto de investigar cómo ingresa el armamento a México, estas agencias, junto con la Oficina de Alcohol, Tabaco, Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (BAFT, por sus siglas en inglés), permitieron el contrabando de armas.
Muchas de ellas coincidentemente llegaron a las manos del Cártel de Sinaloa, según informó la semana pasada en la Cámara de Diputados un ex funcionario de la BAFT que estuvo adscrito en México.
Reporte Indigo presenta los detalles de las negociaciones de “Vicentillo” con la DEA. Seguramente, estas revelaciones sacudirán al gobierno de Barack Obama, aunque también implican a la administración de George Bush.
Ante las declaraciones de Vicente Zambada Niebla, habría que preguntarse: ¿“El Chapo” se convirtió en el narcotraficante más poderoso del mundo porque pactó con el gobierno más poderoso del mundo?
Y la protección que ha recibido el Cártel de Sinaloa por parte de funcionarios mexicanos como los de la Secretaría de Seguridad Pública federal, ¿también es parte del acuerdo?
Éstas son las revelaciones del hijo de “El Mayo” Zambada.

UN JUICIO CLAVE
Vicente Zambada Niebla está marcando un hito en la Corte Federal para el Distrito Norte de Illinois.
Este hombre de 35 años, acusado de conspiración y tráfico de drogas, hijo de uno de los dos jefes del Cártel de Sinaloa, está revelando sus secretos.
Y con eso podría poner en jaque no sólo a la organización criminal que comandan su padre y “El Chapo” Guzmán, sino también al gobierno de Estados Unidos.
Los delitos imputados a Zambada Niebla en EU podrían mantenerlo en prisión durante décadas. Quizá de por vida.
Pero él y su defensa buscan probar que todas las acciones ilegales que le imputan –cometidas entre 2005 y 2008– fueron realizadas con la anuencia del gobierno de Estados Unidos a través de la DEA y el ICE, dos dependencias cuya reputación va a la baja.
El 15 de marzo pasado, Reporte Indigo, en su edición 222, informó en exclusiva el contenido de un documento que ingresó a la Corte. En él se anunciaba que la defensa de Zambada Niebla se basaría en el argumento jurídico de “autoridad pública”.
Eso significa que el tráfico de droga del que se le acusa fue cometido con la anuencia de la autoridad, por lo que hay un “impedimento de la autoridad” para fincarle cargos.
“La autoridad pública para los actos del acusado (Vicente Zambada Niebla) comienza desde el primero de enero de 2004 hasta el 19 de marzo de 2009”, señala el documento.
Después de que ese escrito ingresó a la Corte, el juez Rubén Castillo iba a anunciar el 30 de marzo la fecha de inicio del juicio de “Vicentillo”, como llama “El Mayo” a su hijo.
“Debido a las implicaciones internacionales”, dijo el primer juez de origen latino en Chicago, se decidió aplazar hasta el 15 de junio la definición de la fecha para empezar el juicio.
Y el 15 de junio, Castillo determinó que el juicio –que se espera sea largo– iniciará el 16 de febrero de 2012. Además, fijó el 30 de agosto como fecha límite para la presentación de las mociones de la defensa.
Un día antes de la fecha límite, Zambada Niebla anunció que se jugará todo. Y eso significa denunciar los presuntos acuerdos entre la DEA y el ICE con el Cártel de Sinaloa, de los cuales, afirma, tenía conocimiento el Departamento de Justicia del gobierno de Estados Unidos.
Parece ser la primera vez que un capo del nivel del hijo de “El Mayo” descorre el velo del oscuro modo de actuar de la DEA y el ICE, que, a cambio de información para sus investigaciones, son capaces de dar inmunidad a los integrantes del Cártel de Sinaloa, provocando indirectamente que se avive la sangrienta guerra en territorio mexicano.
En su confesión, Vicente Zambada Niebla reconoce haber entregado a la DEA información valiosa sobre los cárteles enemigos de la organización que encabezan su padre y “El Chapo”.
El personaje central de ese pacto, revela “Vicentillo”, es un narcotraficante que hasta ahora ha sido prácticamente ignorado por el gobierno de México, aunque sabe de su existencia: Humberto Loya.

EL MISTERIOSO MR. LOYA
Humberto Loya, mejor conocido como “El licenciado Pérez”, abogado de profesión, es integrante del Cártel de Sinaloa desde la década de los 80.
A principios de los 90, se convirtió en “asesor y confidente” de “El Mayo” Zambada y “El Chapo” Guzmán, reveló “Vicentillo”a través de su defensa en el documento entregado a la Corte.
“A inicios o durante el año 1998 Loya entró en un acuerdo con el gobierno de Estados Unidos a través de agentes que entonces trabajaban en el Departamento de Justicia de EU, incluyendo el Servicio de Migración y Naturalización (ahora Departamento de Seguridad Interna, Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas, ICE), y la DEA. Bajo el acuerdo Loya debía proveer información al gobierno, especialmente acerca de cárteles rivales, a cambio de inmunidad para actos de Loya realizados antes y continuados. Loya entendió que el acuerdo fue conocido y aprobado por abogados en el Departamento de Justicia y los líderes del Cártel de Sinaloa”, se señala en el documento presentado por el hijo de “El Mayo”.
“A cambio de la información que proveyó, a Loya se le prometió inmunidad por anteriores y futuras actividades vinculadas con el Cártel de Sinaloa y que la acusación penal en su contra en San Diego sería desechada”.
Y según Vicente Zambada Niebla, el pacto de Loya fue honrado.
“De hecho, en diciembre de 2008, el caso contra Loya en San Diego fue desechado, representando el cumplimiento del compromiso del gobierno de proporcionar inmunidad acordada. Tampoco Loya ha sido procesado por nada desde entonces”.
‘SOY PARTE DEL PACTO’: Vicente Zambada Niebla
“El demandado fue parte de ese arreglo entre el gobierno de Estados Unidos, a través de sus oficiales, y del Cártel de Sinaloa, a través de Loya. El demandado proporcionó información que Loya transmitió al gobierno. Como Loya, él (Vicente Zambada Niebla) también estaba bajo proceso y el arreglo contemplaba que el demandado iba a recibir inmunidad como Loya”, afirma la defensa del hijo de “El Mayo” en el documento entregado a la Corte.
“Vicentillo” asegura que en 2008,  cuando ocurrió la fractura entre “El Chapo” y “El Mayo” con los Beltrán Leyva y Vicente Carrillo Fuentes, Loya informó al gobierno de EU que tendrían un nuevo interlocutor con el Cártel de Sinaloa para seguir colaborando mutuamente. El Cártel proporcionando información de sus enemigos, y la DEA y el ICE brindando protección.
“En 2008, Loya aconsejó al gobierno que el demandado (Vicente Zambada Niebla) iba de ahí en adelante a tomar el rol de enlace principal entre el Cártel de Sinaloa con el gobierno de Estados Unidos”, señala el documento.
Después de que “Vicentillo” tomara la estafeta para continuar los acuerdos, tuvo su primer encuentro con la DEA. Fue el 19 de marzo de 2008 en un hotel de la Ciudad de México. Era un gesto temerario de confianza mutua.
“El encuentro tuvo lugar en la Ciudad de México, entre Loya y el acusado (Vicente Zambada Niebla), por una de las partes, y agentes de la DEA de Washington y México, por la otra. Durante ese tiempo, la DEA estaba investigando el caso que dio origen a esta acusación (penal) por al menos ocho meses”, afirma el hijo de “El Mayo”.
“Un agente de la DEA llamado ‘Manny’ (de apellido desconocido) quien había interactuado extensivamente con Loya, estaba ahí. También estaba presente un agente de la DEA llamado David, y los dos agentes dejaron claro que estaban ahí con la aprobación de abogados del Departamento de Justicia de Washinton. Otros agentes de la DEA con base en Washington también estaban en el hotel.
“En este encuentro el demandado dio información adicional”.
En su defensa, Zambada Niebla afirma que asistir a esa reunión implicaba dejar el lugar seguro donde se encontraba –no señala cuál– para exponerse a ser víctima de un daño físico por parte de otros, “incluyendo cárteles extremadamente peligrosos de los cuales dio información valiosa”. Y afirma que adicionalmente, al viajar a la Ciudad de México, se arriesgó a ser arrestado por autoridades mexicanas.

LE OFRECIERON INMUNIDAD TOTAL
“En el encuentro, se dejó en claro que la existencia del acuerdo con Estados Unidos, que cubría a Loya y al demandado –la cual lo inmunizó de sus acciones–, continuaría”.
Vicente Zambada Niebla afirma en el escrito que le dijeron que recibiría inmunidad no sólo bajo el acuerdo previo con Loya, sino también por el acuerdo que personalmente estaban haciendo con él, “aprobado al más alto nivel del gobierno”.
Como prueba del acuerdo, señala que aun cuando tenía una orden de arresto y estuvo físicamente en presencia de los agentes de la DEA, no fue detenido, sino que lo dejaron ir libremente del hotel donde se llevó a cabo el encuentro.

LOYA SÍ ES OPERADOR DE ‘EL CHAPO’
El testimonio sin precedente de Vicente Zambada Niebla es veraz. Por lo menos en algunas partes que se han podido comprobar.
Efectivamente, “El licenciado Pérez” ha sido un muy importante operador de la organización de “El Mayo” Zambada y “El Chapo” Guzmán.
En expedientes judiciales de la Procuraduría General de la República obtenidos por Reporte Indigo en la investigación realizada sobre la “fuga” de Guzmán Loera de Puente Grande, aparecen dos hombres clave del Cártel de Sinaloa: los hermanos Humberto y Jesús Loya.
De acuerdo a lo confesado en noviembre del año 2000 por el testigo protegido de la PGR José Javier Burgueño Urias, bajo el alias de “César”, Humberto Loya trabajaba desde la década de los 90 para los narcotraficantes Ismael Zambada García, Arturo y Héctor Beltrán Leyva –cuando eran parte del clan– y “El Chapo”, aunque éste se encontraba en prisión.
Según su declaración ministerial, de la cual se tiene copia y fue publicada en el libro “Los Señores del Narco”, de Anabel Hernández, Humberto Loya y su hermano se dedicaban a establecer contacto y reclutar a funcionarios mexicanos mediante el pago de sobornos. Dicho sea de paso, eran muy exitosos.
“César”afirmó a la PGR que él contactó a Sergio Fierro Chávez con Arturo Beltrán Leyva y “El Chapo” Guzmán. Fierro Chávez había sido piloto de Guzmán Loera, pero luego se peleó con él.
Con el tiempo, Fierro Chávez se convirtió en un importante traficante de drogas y estableció su propia oficina en Colombia. Cuando Arturo Beltrán quiso volver a reclutarlo para asociarse con él, tuvo que consultar a “El Chapo”, quien era socio de la organización criminal a la que también pertenecía “El Mayo” Zambada.
“Fue así como el señor Jesús Loya y el señor Humberto Loya hablaron con el señor Joaquín Guzmán, este ya estando preso, y fue así como Joaquín Guzmán lo perdonó y se presentó con el señor Arturo Beltrán en Querétaro. Fue ahí donde yo lo conocí, o sea al señor Arturo Beltrán, y tiempo después, tres o cuatro meses, por órdenes de Arturo Beltrán, nos dirigimos al estado de Veracruz para recibir un avión con un mínimo de dos toneladas y un máximo de cuatro toneladas, trabajo en el que participó el señor Albino Quintero y un comandante de apellido Cantú, trabajo en el que participó el licenciado Humberto Loya haciendo los arreglos en intercepción aérea, y el convenio era que se debía notificar al director de intercepción la ruta por donde se iba a venir dicho avión(…)”, se asienta en la declaración ministerial de “César”.
“(…) Todas esas personas que he mencionado son integrantes del Cártel de que los medios de comunicación han identificado como el Cártel de Sinaloa”, dijo el testigo protegido, “siendo el licenciado Humberto Loya el encargado de darle seguridad y protección a cada uno de los mencionados contratando y siendo intermediario para las compras de las plazas de la Policía Judicial Federal en los Estados que se requiriera, y en ocasiones haciendo arreglos por medio del licenciado Fernando Bringas Camacho, para que se encargara de los arreglos con militares(…)”.

DEL CASO IRÁN-CONTRAS A RÁPIDO Y FURIOSO
De resultar ciertas las afirmaciones del hijo de “El Mayo”, el pacto entre las agencias estadounidenses con el Cártel de Sinaloa sería tan grave como el caso Irán-Contras que casi desquebrajó al gobierno de Ronald Reagan.
En aquel entonces, la CIA pactó con narcotraficantes de Colombia, Honduras y México a cambio de que éstos destinaran recursos para financiar al movimiento armado de Nicaragua conocido como “La Contra”, cuyo objetivo era derrocar al gobierno del dictador Anastasio Somoza.
Cuando esto se descubrió, a mediados de la década de los 90, el Congreso de Estados Unidos inició una investigación presidida por el ex candidato presidencial John Kerry.
El acuerdo de la CIA con los narcos propició que aumentaran considerablemente el tráfico y el consumo de drogas en Estados Unidos. La ayuda que brindaron los narcotraficantes al gobierno tácitamente les garantizó impunidad para realizar sus operaciones ilegales.
En 1979, cuando Somoza fue sacado del gobierno y llegó Violeta Chamorro al poder, los narcosocios de la CIA comenzaron a ser detenidos.
La DEA, el ICE y BAFT atraviesan hoy por una crisis institucional que ha provocado el despido de funcionarios de alto nivel.
Con el pretexto de rastrear a narcotraficantes en México, la Oficina de Alcohol, Tabaco, Armas y Explosivos (BAFT, por sus siglas en inglés), la DEA y el ICE permitieron durante más de un año que entraran al territorio mexicano más de 2 mil rifles de asalto y 50 rifles estilo francotirador, además de miles de municiones.
Ante el escándalo que llegó hasta la Casa Blanca, a finales de junio renunció a su cargo Kenneth Melson, quien fue director de BAFT.
Si son ciertas las afirmaciones hechas por el hijo de uno de los jefes del Cártel de Sinaloa, el Congreso de Estados Unidos tendría que investigar si el envío de armas que benefició a esa organización criminal fue accidental o parte del “acuerdo”.

QUE CUMPLAN EL ACUERDO
Horas después de la reunión en la que se pactó el presunto “acuerdo”, Vicente Zambada Niebla fue detenido en Fuentes del Pedregal por el Ejército Mexicano.
De acuerdo a la información dada a conocer por el gobierno federal, el hijo de “El Mayo” y su escolta presuntamente portaban armas de uso exclusivo del Ejército.
“Vicentillo” estuvo bajo custodia del gobierno de México y libró legalmente todos los cargos que tenía en su contra por tráfico de droga.
Pero el 18 de febrero de 2010, el hijo de “El Mayo” fue extraditado a Estados Unidos por el proceso abierto en su contra en Chicago después de su detención. Actualmente se encuentra en una cárcel federal de esa ciudad.
Vicente Zambada Niebla es acusado por el gobierno de Estados Unidos de haber conspirado, junto con otras personas, entre mayo de 2005 y noviembre de 2008, para introducir a Estados Unidos por lo menos 5 o más kilogramos de cocaína y más de un kilo de heroína, obteniendo ingresos estimados en 500 millones de dólares.
En el proceso abierto en su contra, también se señala que intentó obtener armas con el fin de usar la fuerza y la violencia para defender su organización criminal.
“Durante las actas el gobierno de Estados Unidos nunca informó a México de los acuerdos que había hecho con el señor Zambada Niebla y el Cártel de Sinaloa”, se señala en otro de los documentos entregados a la Corte Federal por la defensa de “Vicentillo”.
“Pero el acuerdo en curso y el compromiso de concederle inmunidad ya había sido hecho y seguido por agentes federales actuando con autoridad y a nombre del Departamento de Justicia”.
Con base en lo anterior, la defensa de Zambada Niebla pide que su cliente sea liberado y que sean desechados todos los cargos en su contra y la acusación penal, ya que todas las acciones fueron hechas, según su dicho, con el permiso del gobierno de EU, y eso impide a las autoridades estadounidenses levantar una acusación en su contra.
Para el próximo 3 de agosto está programada una audiencia pública en la sala del juez Rubén Castillo en la Corte Federal del Distrito Norte de Illinois, la cual se encuentra en el centro de Chicago.
En esa sesión, en la que estarán presentes Vicente Zambada Niebla, su defensa y la fiscalía representante del gobierno de Estados Unidos, se discutirá el rumbo que seguirá el proceso judicial y se hablará de las insólitas mociones presentadas.
La semana pasada, el presidente Barack Obama anunció una nueva estrategia para combatir a las organizaciones criminales transnacionales.
Señaló a Los Zetas como la organización más peligrosa para Estados Unidos. No mencionó al Cártel de Sinaloa en el documento donde se desglosa la estrategia.
Sin embargo, hay una afirmación que vale la pena destacar: se reconoce que los funcionarios e instituciones del gobierno de Estados Unidos no están exentos de ser corrompidos ni penetrados por los cárteles de la droga.
Todavía tienen que ser presentadas más evidencias sobre el presunto pacto de inmunidad entre el gobierno de Estados Unidos y el Cártel de Sinaloa.
El hecho es que 13 años después del supuesto acuerdo, el Cártel de Sinaloa es el más poderoso de América. Uno de sus actuales jefes, “El Mayo” Zambada, sigue libre. Y Joaquín Guzmán Loera es considerado por la propia DEA –quizá con una buena dosis de cinismo– como el narcotraficante más poderoso de todos los tiempos.