Reporting Suspicious Behavior: Homeland Security Buys 450 million Bullets


See something, say something. Suspicious behavior must be denounced immediately to the pertinent authorities. So let’s be patriotic and report what seems to be very concerning events associated with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

While White House officials, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the NRA and other organizations are out literally hunting people who legally buy and carry weapons ( second amendment right) sell raw milk, fresh organic vegetables and survival kits because such behaviors are seen as potential terrorist activities, the Department of Homeland Security has now invested tax payer money to acquire 450 million new bullets. It is however strange, when citizens legally approach vendors at gun fairs or stores to purchase a revolver or an automatic riffle with ammunition. This is seen as dangerous, because in the government’s opinion, people do not know and cannot protect themselves. The government must do that.

According to official documents, both the DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), have purchased an indefinite number of deliveries of .40 caliber ammunition from one of their defense contractors called release issued by ATK itself, the company has won a contract from DHS and ICE to provide the ammunition during a period of five years. Specifications about the bullets reveal that the HST type ammunition offer “optimum penetration for terminal performance.”What this means, is that on impact, the bullet causes more damage on the target. Isn’t that suspicious?

Why would DHS want to overstock bullets during the same period of time when the global economy is thought to completely collapse? Even stranger is why would ICE receive any of these bullets if they will have no use for them. ICE makes sure that the country’s borders remain wide open with zero monitoring of drug and weapons trafficking — Fast & Furious smuggling program — while blaming the second amendment for the increase in violence on the streets of Mexico and the U.S.

But DHS’s suspicious behavior does not end there. According to Business Insider, the Department currently has an open bid for contractors that would like to provide riffle ammunition. “Listed on the federal business opportunities network, they’re looking for up to 175 million rounds of .223 caliber ammo to be exact. The .223 is almost exactly the same round used by NATO forces, the 5.56 x 45mm,” describes the report.

It looks like the U.S. government is preparing for an imminent invasion or perhaps intends to take as much ammunition from the street as possible. Or even better, it’s preparing for a massive citizen insurrection as the country collapses due to the corruption that descended on the United States for the past century, which has convinced many folks that it is time to get ready for the coming social unrest.

Other suspicious activity by the DHS includes partnerships with FEMA for the acquisition of thousands of plastic coffins, the use of unmanned drones to spy on citizens, the preparation and revamping of interment camps, the placement of gigantic monitors all over the United States, as in the movie 1984; and of course, the latest addition to its wide network of public oppression: the SAR Database, a virtual library of reports from citizens, who are encouraged to spy on each other and denounce any strange actions carried out by family members, work colleagues and their friends from across the street. According to a report by Network World, the nationwide database will help law enforcement “connect the dots” so they can easily find terrorists who are conspiring to carry out an attack.

The article says that the details of the reports issued through SAR will be overseen by the Justice Department. That is a good tactic for the government, because it means they will be able to filter out any information that may trample government’s work, such as shipping out weapons to the Sinaloa Cartel, shipping in heroin from Afghanistan, supporting or hiding money laundering activities by big international banks or kidnapping and torturing people who speak against its policies. But what do you know? Maybe, this new database will allow the government to finally get a hold of itself and end with economic terrorism which is being waged right now on the American people. Perhaps the FBI will be able to hunt down Wall Street speculators and CEOs from corporations that deceive investors by advising them to put their money into derivative products. How about putting an end to companies that hire illegal aliens who are then

Make no mistake, the Department of Homeland Security is into something.

You may share our original content as long as you respect our copyright policy as shown on our website footer. Please don’t cut articles from The Real Agenda to redistribute by email or post to the web if you don’t follow our policies.

Luis Miranda is the founder and editor of The Real Agenda. For more of his stories, subscribe to our article feed. You can also follow him on Twitter and Facebook. Email article ideas and insights through the Contact page.


Cartel de Sinaloa es protegido por EE.UU.

Por Bill Conroy
The Narcosphere
03 de septiembre 2011

Originalmente publicado 31 de julio 2011

Traducido al Español por Luis R. Miranda

La presunta inmunidad de los jefes de Sinaloa fue dada a cambio de proporcionar información sobre las organizaciones de narcotraficantes rivales.

El hijo de un peso pesado en una poderosa organización de narcotráfico de México ha presentado explosivos alegatos legales ante un tribunal federal en Chicago acusando al gobierno de EE.UU. de cerrar un acuerdo con el “Cartel de Sinaloa”, y de darle “carta blanca para continuar con el contrabando de toneladas de drogas ilícitas en Chicago y el resto de los Estados Unidos. “

La fuente de esa afirmación es Jesús Vicente Zambada Niebla, hijo de Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada García, uno de los líderes del Cartel de Sinaloa – una poderosa organización que importa armas a México y que exporta drogas al exterior del país.

El capo superior de la organización de Sinaloa, llamado así por el estado de la costa del Pacífico mexicano donde tiene su sede, es Joaquín Guzmán Loera (El Chapo) – quien escapó de una prisión de máxima seguridad en México en 2001, sólo días antes de ser programado para ser extraditado a los Estados Unidos. Chapo desde entonces ha liderado uno de los más poderosos “cárteles” en México. Con la muerte de Osama Bin Laden en mayo, Chapo (un apodo en español que significa “enano”) saltó a la cima de los “más buscados” del FBI. Él también apareció en la revista Forbes en 2010 como “una de las personas más más poderosas del mundo.”

Zambada Niebla, él mismo un actor clave en la organización de Sinaloa, fue detenido en Ciudad de México en marzo de 2009 y febrero pasado, y extraditado a Estados Unidos para ser juzgado por cargos relacionados al narcotráfico.

La acusación pendiente contra Zambada Niebla afirma que actuó como “coordinador de logística” para el “cártel”, que ayuda a supervisar una operación que importa en los EE.UU. “múltiples toneladas de cocaína … utilizando diversos medios, incluyendo pero no limitado a, aviones Boeing 747, aviones privados … autobuses, vagones, tractores, remolques, y automóviles. ”

Zambada Niebla también dice ser un activo del gobierno de EE.UU.. Su acusación fue presentada originalmente en un documento de dos páginas presentado a finales de marzo ante el Tribunal de Distrito de EE.UU. en el Norte de Illinois en Chicago.

Las últimas acusaciones hechas por Zambada Niebla, quien se encuentra detenido en confinamiento solitario en una celda de la cárcel de Chicago, incluyen mociones presentadas a finales de esta semana en una corte federal. Esos escritos explican la supuesta relación de cooperación entre el Departamento de Justicia de EE.UU. y sus diversos organismos, incluyendo la DEA y el FBI, y los líderes del “Cartel de Sinaloa” – incluyendo Zambada Niebla.

La supuesta relación fue cultivada a través de un abogado mexicano, Humberto Loya Castro, quien Zambada Niebla afirma, es un miembro del cártel de Sinaloa y “un confidente cercano de Joaquín Guzmán Loera (El Chapo).”

De los escritos de corte de Zambada Niebla, presentados el 29 de julio:

[Humberto] Loya fue indicado junto con el Chapo y [el padre de Zambada Niebla ] en Mayo de 1995 en el Distrito Sur de California y acusado de participar en una conspiración de narcotráfico masivo (Caso N º 95CR0973). Ese caso fue desestimado a pedido de la fiscalía en 2008 después de que Loya se convirtió en un informante del gobierno de Estados Unidos y había proporcionado información por un período de más de diez años.

En algún momento antes de 2004 [cuando George W. Bush era presidente], y continuando hasta el período de tiempo cubierto en la acusación, el gobierno de Estados Unidos llegó a un acuerdo con Loya y el liderazgo del cártel de Sinaloa, incluidos Mayo y El Chapo.

Bajo ese acuerdo, el cártel de Sinaloa, a través de Loya, proporcionaría información acumulada por Mayo, El Chapo, y otros, sobre sus rivales -Organizaciones Mexicanas del Narcotráfico- para el gobierno de los Estados Unidos. A cambio, el gobierno de Estados Unidos acordó desestimar el enjuiciamiento de la causa pendiente contra Loya, para no interferir con sus actividades de tráfico de drogas y los del cártel de Sinaloa; no procesarlo, ni a Chapo ni a Mayo, ni a los cabecillas del Cartel de Sinaloa.

La protección concedida a los líderes del Cartel de Sinaloa, de acuerdo con las demandas judiciales, incluyó el ser “informados por los agentes de la DEA, a través de Loya, que agentes del gobierno de Estados Unidos y / o las autoridades mexicanas estaban llevando a cabo investigaciones cerca de los territorios de origen de los líderes de los cárteles a fin de que los líderes del Cartel de Sinaloa pudieran evadir a los investigadores “.

Además, dicen los alegatos, el gobierno de EE.UU. acordó no “compartir la información que tenían sobre el cártel de Sinaloa y / o los líderes del cártel de Sinaloa con el gobierno mexicano a fin de asegurar que no serían detenidos y por lo que sus operaciones no se verían afectadas. ”

Más de las alegaciones del 29 de julio:

   Zambada Niebla fue parte en el acuerdo entre el gobierno de Estados Unidos y el cártel de Sinaloa y proporcionaba información al gobierno de Estados Unidos a través de Loya de conformidad con el acuerdo.

… Loya planeo un encuentro entre Zambada Niebla y agentes del gobierno de Estados Unidos en el Hotel Sheraton en Ciudad de México en marzo [17] de 2009 [después de que la administración Obama asumió el poder] con el propósito de presentar al Sr. Zambada Niebla a los agentes y con el propósito de continuar proporcionando información a la DEA y al gobierno de Estados Unidos, personalmente, y no a través de Loya.

La acusación federal contra Loya había sido eliminada en 2008, [mientras que Bush todavía estaba en la Casa Blanca] y el representante de la DEA, dijo al señor Loya-Castro que querían establecer una relación más personal con el señor Zambada Niebla para que pudieran tratar con él directamente bajo el acuerdo. El Sr. Zambada Niebla creía que bajo el acuerdo previo, todas las actividades del cártel de Sinaloa, incluyendo el tipo descrito en la acusación, estarían cubiertas por el acuerdo, y que era inmune a detención o procesamiento.

Zambada Niebla dice, en los informes judiciales, que asistió a la reunión de marzo de 2009 en el hotel en la ciudad de México como estaba previsto, con la presencia de Loya, y si bien, a pesar de que estaba entonces bajo acusación en los EE.UU., agentes del gobierno federal de los EE.UU. le aseguraron que no iba a ser arrestado y que se habían hecho arreglos “al más alto nivel del gobierno de los Estados Unidos” para asegurar su inmunidad a cambio de su cooperación en el suministro de información sobre organizaciones rivales de narcotraficantes.

Sin embargo, Zambada Niebla sostiene que fue traicionado, a pesar de la seguridad de los agentes de EE.UU..

Afirma en su alegato que los agentes del gobierno “se mostraron satisfechos con la información que había proporcionado a ellos” en la reunión en el Hotel Sheraton el 17 de marzo de 2009, y que “nuevos planes se hicieron para reunirse con él.”

“El Sr. Zambada Niebla luego salió de la reunión, “los informes judiciales afirman. “Aproximadamente cinco horas después de la reunión en el [hotel], el Sr. Zambada Niebla, fue detenido por las autoridades mexicanas.”

Fast & Furious (Rápido & Furioso) y la Casa de la Muerte

Los alegatos de Zambada Niebla también hacen referencia a la polémica acción de la Oficina de Alcohol, Tabaco, Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (ATF) de Estados Unidos en la que la organización utilizó y fomentó el tráfico de armas a través del programa Fast and Furious – una operación, ahora investigado en audiencias en el Congreso, que supuestamente permitió que unas 2.000 armas fueran enviadas de contrabando desde Estados Unidos a México bajo los auspicios de ATF. Zambada Niebla sostiene que Fast and Furious es otro ejemplo de la complicidad del gobierno de EE.UU. en la carnicería de la guerra contra las drogas.

De las declaraciones de Zambada Niebla:

    El gobierno de Estados Unidos considera los acuerdos con el cártel de Sinaloa un precio aceptable a pagar, ya que el principal objetivo era la destrucción y el desmantelamiento de los cárteles rivales con la ayuda del cártel de Sinaloa – sin tener en cuenta el hecho de que toneladas de drogas ilícitas siguen siendo contrabandeadas en Chicago y en otras partes de los Estados Unidos y el consumo continua prácticamente sin cesar.

En esencia, la teoría del gobierno de Estados Unidos para librar su “guerra contra las drogas” ha sido y sigue siendo que “el fin justifica los medios” y que es más importante recibir información sobre las actividades de los carteles de drogas rivales del Cártel de Sinaloa a cambio de que se les permita continuar sus actividades criminales, incluyendo y no limitado a su contrabando de toneladas de narcóticos ilegales en los Estados Unidos. Esto es confirmado por las recientes revelaciones de la investigación del Comité del Congreso del Departamento de Justicia, la DEA, el FBI y la ATF en su “guerra contra las drogas” en la operación conocida como “Fast & Furious”.

Como resultado de la operación Fast and Furious, los escritos afirman, “tres mil personas” en México fueron asesinadas “, incluyendo agentes del orden público en el Estado de Sinaloa, México, sede del cártel de Sinaloa.”
Entre los que recibieron las armas a través de la operación de la ATF, dicen los alegatos, estan informantes de la DEA y el FBI que trabajan para organizaciones de la droga, incluyendo los cabecillas de esos grupos.

“La evidencia parece indicar que el Departamento de Justicia no sólo se permite que criminales contrabandeen armas, sino que sus dólares contribuyentes en forma de pagos a informantes. Estos dólares financiaron a quienes participan en tales actividades”, dicen los documentos. “… Es evidente que fue permitido que armas terminaran en las manos de informantes del FBI y otros representantes del cártel de Sinaloa y que entre las personas asesinadas por esas armas habían agentes de la ley.

“… El señor Zambada Niebla considera que la documentación que solicitó [del gobierno de EE.UU.] confirmará que las armas recibidas por los miembros del cártel de Sinaloa y sus líderes durante la operación ‘Fast & Furious’ fueron recibidas conforme al acuerdo celebrado entre los Estados Unidos y el confidente del [Chapo Guzmán], el Sr. Loya Castro, en nombre del cártel de Sinaloa que es el tema de su [Zambada Niebla] defensa [sobre] la autoridad pública. ”

Los alegatos de Zambada Niebla, incluso hacen referencia a la infame Casa de la Muerte, llamada así por NarcoNews, que ha publicado una serie exhaustiva de reportajes de investigación sobre el caso de asesinatos en masa que se remontan a 2004.

De las alegaciones:

    El Sr. Zambada Niebla también pide … que el gobierno de Estados Unidos le brinde material relativo a la los asesinatos de la … “Casa de la Muerte”, que tuvieron lugar en Ciudad Juárez, México, y fueron cometidos por los informantes del gobierno de Estados Unidos. Como se confirma en el Informe de Evaluación Conjunta [JAT] preparado por las autoridades gubernamentales en la investigación de los asesinatos, los agentes del gobierno de Estados Unidos tenían conocimiento previo de que los asesinatos iban a ser cometidos por sus informantes, pero no tomaron ninguna medida para informar tanto al gobierno mexicano como a las futuras víctimas, ya que los representantes del gobierno determinaron que era más importante proteger la identidad de sus informantes.

Los informantes estaban ayudando al gobierno de Estados Unidos en las investigaciones de grandes narcotraficantes y el gobierno determinó que la muerte de más de un centenar de ciudadanos mexicanos era un precio aceptable a pagar porque les permitiría continuar sus investigaciones sobre narcóticos.

La Gran Pretensión Desenmascarada

En su respuesta al reclamo de Zambada Niebla de que estaba trabajando bajo “autoridad pública” como informante o fuente confidencial, fiscales federales de EE.UU. no negaron que Zambada Niebla fuera un activo de gobierno de los EE.UU.. Ellos argumentan, en cambio, que “el gobierno niega que el acusado [Zambada Niebla] ejercitó sus acciones bajo “autoridad pública” cuando cometió los delitos graves en la acusación.” En otras palabras, si a Zambada Niebla se le ofreció algún tipo de acuerdo, a cambio de su cooperación, los delitos cometidos por el acusado no son eximidos bajo tal acuerdo.

Los fiscales federales también piden en la orden judicial que Zambada Niebla, antes del juicio, “muestre evidencia de que un oficial específico del gobierno de Estados Unidos o funcionarios con autoridad real o aparente dieron autorización expresa a [él] para importar varios kilogramos de cocaína y heroína a los Estados Unidos, como dice su testimonio, o que expresamente le aseguraran que estos hechos no revestirían penas, y que [él] razonablemente confió en estas comunicaciones. ”

NarcoNews habló con varios ex agentes de la DEA y el FBI sobre la afirmación de Zambada Niebla de que él trabajaba, en esencia, como informante para el gobierno de los EE.UU.. Ninguno de los ex agentes, que pidieron que sus nombres no se revelaran, consideran fuera del ámbito la posibilidad de que Zambada Niebla podría haber llegado a un acuerdo con el gobierno de los EE.UU..

De hecho, un ex agente de la DEA, dijo que para hacer esa afirmación, Zambada Niebla esencialmente puso su vida en peligro por salir en público como un informante, un movimiento extremo que parece indicar que al menos él cree que había un acuerdo existente.

Pero, al final, todos los ex agentes federales estuvieron de acuerdo en que a menos que Zambada Niebla cuente con una prueba de sus alegaciones de que sus acciones fueron aprobadas legalmente, tiene pocas posibilidades de triunfar – y al menos uno de los ex agentes, dijo que los fiscales probablemente no lo habrían desafiado para producir esa prueba si no tuvieran un alto grado de confianza de que no existe.

Un ex agente del FBI lo explicó de esta manera:

    Las directrices generales de los fiscales de EE.UU. requiere que exista un documento escrito, una “nota de actividades criminales”, firmado por ambas partes. En este documento se explica exactamente lo que el informante está autorizado a hacer y le dice que puede ser procesado por cualquier otra actividad ilegal. Esto debería ser proporcionado a la defensa, sin embargo, no siempre sucede. Algunos abogados no son conscientes de esto y no lo piden, y el gobierno no lo da porque sí.

Sospecho que el gobierno no proporcionó este documento a la defensa y es por eso que exigen que den prueba de su estatus. … Sería muy fácil de demostrar lo que estaba autorizado a hacer si tuviera la nota. [Así que] esto puede ser un caso de que la nota no se había hecho ….

El ex agente de la DEA, que tiene amplia experiencia en el extranjero, añadió:

Mi instinto me dice que era un informante. Es [el alegato de Zambada Niebla] un esfuerzo por “asustar” al gobierno para que elimine o reduzca los cargos. Posturas, por así decirlo. Pero hay un riesgo sustancial para él. Es casi un último esfuerzo. De no ser así, el acusado no querría ser expuestos como haber colaborado con los agentes del gobierno. Sin embargo, tendrá un enorme desafío al probar sus afirmaciones.

… Un agente [o agencia del gobierno de EE.UU. podría aprobar este tipo de relación de cooperación con un narcotraficante] … por lo que el agente puede engancharse a un traficante de alto nivel y obtener como resultado premios, elogios y promociones. A veces, no es el soborno directamente o regalos de valor. Es una victoria para el informante criminal porque pueden ganar más dinero de la trata y al mismo tiempo reciben pagos en efectivo por parte del gobierno de los arrestos que se hacen. Y eso no es todo: el miedo propio del informante de ser detenido se reduce y tiene una oportunidad única para destruir efectivamente su competencia no deseada y sus archienemigos.

Y otro agente de la DEA señala que “sí existe una cosa llamada operación de exención del Procurador General, donde el Procurador General de los Estados Unidos [en el caso de Zambada Niebla, que al parecer se remonta a por lo menos 2004, habría sido dada por el Fiscal General de la administración Bush] podrá autorizar que las leyes se violen [por un informante para avanzar en un caso] “.

“Esto se hace generalmente en las investigaciones de lavado de dinero”, dijo la fuente de la DEA.

La otra posibilidad, el ex agente de la DEA añade, es que Zambada Niebla fue engañado en un nivel más profundo, y, de hecho, no trató con agencias de EE.UU., sino más bien con una operación de inteligencia de la CIA.

“Esta no sería la primera vez que la CIA ha utilizado un informante haciendole creer que era una operación del FBI, ICE y la DEA”, dijo la fuente de la DEA.

Si ese es el caso, el ex agente de la DEA, añade, el caso de Zambada Niebla está hundido, ya que incluso si los documentos y otras pruebas existen para probar sus denuncias de la complicidad del gobierno de EE.UU., esa evidencia es casi seguro que quedaría enterrada bajo la excusa de “seguridad nacional” que sería invocada por el mismo gobierno de EE.UU.

Estén atentos …

Sinaloa Cartel Becomes King of Mexico Meth Production

With the decline of Mexico‘s Familia Michoacana drug gang, it appears that the Sinaloa Cartel has stepped up as the largest distributor of methamphetamine to the U.S., illustrating an inherent contradiction in any “war on drugs.”

by  Geoffrey Ramsey
In Sight Crime
September 3, 2011

Over the past several months, the once-mighty Familia Michoacana has suffered several major blows to its organizational structure. In December, police shot and killed Familia leader and founding member Nazario Moreno Gonzalez, a development which caused the group to split into two factions, one of which calls itself the Caballeros Templarios (Knights Templar), while the other has kept the original name. In June, officials arrested another Familia leader, Jose de Jesus Mendez, alias “El Chango,” prompting government security spokesman Alejandro Poire to claim that “what was left of the command structure of this criminal organization is destroyed.”

He may be right — now, in perhaps the clearest sign of the group’s decline, the Familia has reportedly lost its tight hold on the lucrative methamphetamine trade. This has traditionally been the largest source of revenue for the criminal organization. According to the Associated Press, the rival Sinaloa Cartel has taken advantage of the Familia’s weakened state to seize control of meth production, and is expanding on a massive scale. As evidence, the report says that a haul of more than 400 metric tons of precursor chemicals, used to produce meth, that were seized from a warehouse in Queretaro last July belonged to the Sinaloans.

Even more telling than the sheer bulk of chemicals was the way in which they were organized; when police raided the warehouse they found its contents neatly stacked by forklift into separate categories, suggesting that the group has a well-developed industrial process for making and transporting methamphetamine.

This is a classic illustration of the so-called hydra effect, or balloon effect — the process by which each blow a government strikes against one organized criminal group simply allows another to rise and take its place. Following to this theory, targeting individual groups will usually only cause production to shift location or change hands. In this case, the cartel taking over the meth trade, Sinaloa, happens to be the most powerful in the country, which does not bode well for U.S. efforts against this highly addictive substance.

According to one anonymous U.S. law enforcement official in Mexico who spoke to the Associated Press, the Sinaloa Cartel has the potential to surpass the Familia’s meth-exporting efforts, as the group already has an extensive supply chain for bringing cocaine, heroin and marijuana into the United States. “Although La Familia has distribution points in the U.S. … they don’t have the distribution network that Sinaloa Cartel has,” said the official.

What’s more, demand for Mexican meth in the U.S. has gone up in recent years. As the Wall Street Journal reported recently, the Mexican military raided 103 clandestine methamphetamine labs during the first six months of this year, which amounts to a 25 percent increase from the same period in 2010. Meanwhile U.S. border officials seized a record 5,588 kilograms of meth along the border last year, up from 3,602 kilos in 2009. Officials have already seized that much so far this year, and are set to surpass last year’s record.

Court Documents: Sinaloa “Cartel” Protected by U.S. Government

by Bill Conroy
The Narcosphere
September 3, 2011

Originally published July 31, 2011

Deal Allegedly Gave Sinaloa Bosses Immunity in Exchange for Providing Info on Rival Drug Organizations

The son of a heavy hitter in a powerful Mexican drug trafficking organization has filed explosive legal pleadings in federal court in Chicago accusing the US government of cutting a deal with the the “Sinaloa Cartel” that gave its leadership “carte blanche to continue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs into Chicago and the rest of the United States.”

The source of that allegation is Jesus Vicente Zambada Niebla, the son of Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada Garcia, one of the purported top leaders of the Sinaloa drug-trafficking organization — a major Mexican-based importer of weapons and exporter of drugs.

The top capo of the Sinaloa drug organization, named after the Pacific Coast Mexican state where it is based, is Joaquin Guzman Loera (El Chapo) — who escaped from a maximum security prison in Mexico in 2001, only days before he was slated to be extradited to the United States. Chapo has since gone on to build one of the most powerful drug “cartels” in Mexico. With the death of Osama Bin Laden in May, Chapo (a Spanish nickname meaning “shorty”) jumped to the top of the FBI’s “Most Wanted” persons list. He also made Forbes Magazine’s 2010 list of “The World’s Most Powerful People.”

Zambada Niebla, himself a key player in the Sinaloa organization, was arrested in Mexico City in March 2009 and last February extradited to the United States to stand trial on narco-trafficking-related charges.

The indictment pending against Zambada Niebla claims he served as the “logistical coordinator” for the “cartel,” helping to oversee an operation that imported into the US “multi-ton quantities of cocaine … using various means, including but not limited to, Boeing 747 cargo aircraft, private aircraft … buses, rail cars, tractor-trailers, and automobiles.”

Zambada Niebla also claims to be an asset of the US government. His allegation was laid out originally in a two-page court pleading filed in late March with the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago.

The latest allegations being advanced by Zambada Niebla, who is now being held in solitary confinement in a jail cell in Chicago, are laid out in motions filed late this week in federal court. Those pleadings spell out the supposed cooperative relationship between the US Department of Justice and its various agencies, including DEA and the FBI, and the leaders of the “Sinaloa Cartel” — including Zambada Niebla.

That alleged relationship was cultivated through a Mexican attorney, Humberto Loya Castro, whom Zambada Niebla claims is a Sinaloa Cartel member and “a close confidante of Joaquin Guzman Loera (Chapo).”

From Zambada Niebla’s court pleadings, filed on July 29:

[Humberto] Loya was indicted along with Chapo and Mayo [Zambada Niebla’s father] in 1995 in the Southern District of California and charged with participation in a massive narcotics trafficking conspiracy (Case No. 95CR0973). That case was dismissed on the prosecution’s own motion in 2008 after Loya became an informant for the United States government and had provided information for a period of over ten years.

Sometime prior to 2004 [when George W. Bush was president], and continuing through the time period covered in the indictment, the United States government entered into an agreement with Loya and the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel, including Mayo and Chapo.

Under that agreement, the Sinaloa Cartel, through Loya, was to provide information accumulated by Mayo, Chapo, and others, against rival Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations to the United States government. In return, the United States government agreed to dismiss the prosecution of the pending case against Loya, not to interfere with his drug trafficking activities and those of the Sinaloa Cartel, to not actively prosecute him, Chapo, Mayo, and the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel, and to not apprehend them.

The protection extended to the Sinaloa leadership, according to the court filings, included being “informed by agents of the DEA through Loya that United States government agents and/or Mexican authorities were conducting investigations near the home territories of cartel leaders so that the cartel leaders could take appropriate actions to evade investigators.”

In addition, the pleadings allege, the US government agreed not to “share any of the information they had about the Sinaloa Cartel and/or the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel with the Mexican government in order to better assure that they would not be apprehended and so that their operations would not be interfered with.”

More from the July 29 pleadings:

Zambada Niebla was a party to the agreement between the United States government and the Sinaloa Cartel and provided information to the United States government through Loya pursuant to the agreement.

… Loya arranged for Mr. Zambada Niebla to meet with United States government agents at the Sheraton Hotel in Mexico City in March [17th] of 2009 [after the Obama administration took power] for the purpose of introducing Mr. Zambada Niebla to the agents and for the purpose of his continuing to provide information to the DEA and the United States government personally, rather than through Loya.

Loya’s federal case had been dismissed in 2008 [while Bush was still in the White House] and the DEA representative told Mr. Loya-Castro that they wanted to establish a more personal relationship with Mr. Zambada Niebla so that they could deal with him directly under the agreement. Mr. Zambada Niebla believed that under the prior agreement, any activities of the Sinaloa Cartel, including the kind described in the indictment, were covered by the agreement, and that he was immune from arrest or prosecution.

Zambada Niebla claims, in the court pleadings, that he attended the meeting in March 2009 at the hotel in Mexico City as scheduled, with Loya present, and while there, even though he was then under indictment in the US, was told by US federal agents that he would not be arrested and that arrangements had been made “at the highest levels of the United States government” to assure his immunity from prosecution in exchange for his cooperation in providing information on rival narco-trafficking groups.

However, Zambada Niebla contends he was double-crossed, despite the assurance of the US agents.

He alleges in his pleadings that government agents “were satisfied with the information he had provided to them” at the meeting at the Sheraton Hotel on March 17, 2009, and that “arrangements would be made to meet with him again.”

“Mr. Zambada Niebla then left the meeting,” the court pleadings assert. “Approximately five hours after the [hotel] meeting, Mr. Zambada-Niebla was arrested by Mexican authorities.”

Fast, Furious and the House of Death

Zambada Niebla’s pleadings also reference the controversial U.S Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) weapons-trafficking interdiction program Fast and Furious — an operation, now the subject of Congressional hearings, that allegedly allowed some 2,000 guns to be smuggled across the US/Mexican border under ATF’s watch. Zambada Niebla contends that Fast and Furious is yet another example of the US government’s complicity in the carnage of the drug war.

From Zambada Niebla’s pleadings:

The United States government considered the arrangements with the Sinaloa Cartel an acceptable price to pay, because the principal objective was the destruction and dismantling of rival cartels by using the assistance of the Sinaloa Cartel — without regard for the fact that tons of illicit drugs continued to be smuggled into Chicago and other parts of the United States and consumption continued virtually unabated.

Essentially, the theory of the United States government in waging its “war on drugs” has been and continues to be that the “end justifies the means” and that it is more important to receive information about rival drug cartels’ activities from the Sinaloa Cartel in return for being allowed to continue their criminal activities, including and not limited to their smuggling of tons of illegal narcotics into the United States. This is confirmed by recent disclosures by the Congressional Committee’s investigation of the latest Department of Justice, DEA, FBI, and ATF’s “war on drugs” operation known as “Fast & Furious.”

As a result of Operation Fast and Furious, the pleadings assert, about “three thousand people” in Mexico were killed, “including law enforcement officers in the sate of Sinaloa, Mexico, headquarters of the Sinaloa Cartel.”

Among those receiving weapons through the ATF operation, the pleadings continue, were DEA and FBI informants working for drug organizations, including the leadership of those groups.

“The evidence seems to indicate that the Justice Department not only allowed criminals to smuggle weapons, but that tax payers’ dollars in the form of informant payments, may have financed those engaging in such activities,” the pleadings allege. “… It is clear that some of the weapons were deliberately allowed by the FBI and other government representatives to end up in the hands of the Sinaloa Cartel and that among the people killed by those weapons were law enforcement officers.

“… Mr. Zambada Niebla believes that the documentation that he requests [from the US government] will confirm that the weapons received by Sinaloa Cartel members and its leaders in Operation ‘Fast & Furious’ were provided under the agreement entered into between the United States government and [Chapo Guzman confidante] Mr. Loya Castro on behalf of the Sinaloa Cartel that is the subject of his [Zambada Niebla’s] defense [regarding] public authority.”

The Zambada Niebla pleadings even reference the infamous House of Death case, so named by Narco News, which has published an exhaustive series of investigative stories on the mass-murder case dating back to 2004.

From the pleadings:

Mr. Zambada Niebla also requests … that the United States government produce material relating to the … “House of Death” murders, which took place in Juarez, Mexico, and were committed by United States government informants. As confirmed in the Joint Assessment Report [JAT] prepared by government authorities investigating those murders, agents of the United States government had prior knowledge that murders were going to be committed by their informants but did not take any measures to either inform the Mexican government or the intended victims, because government representatives determined it was moreimportant to protect the identity of their informants.

The informants were assisting the United States government in the investigations of major drug traffickers and the government determined that the killings of over a hundred Mexican citizens was an acceptable price to pay for enabling them to continue their narcotics investigations.

The Great Pretense Unmasked

In its response to Zambada Niebla’s claim that he was working under “public authority” as an informant or confidential source, US federal prosecutors don’t claim outright that he was not a US government asset. They argue, instead, only that “the government denies that defendant [Zambada Niebla] exercised public authority when he committed the serious crimes charged in the indictment.” In other words, even if Zambada Niebla was offered some type of deal in exchange for his cooperation, that deal did not extend to the specific acts he is accused of in the indictment against him.

Federal prosecutors also ask that the court order Zambada Niebla to produce, prior to trial, “evidence that a specific American official or officials with actual or apparent authority expressly authorized [him] to import multi-kilogram quantities of cocaine and heroin into the United States, as charged in the indictment, or expressly assured [him] that these acts were not criminal, and that [he] reasonably relied on these communications.”

Narco News spoke with several former DEA and FBI agents about Zambada Niebla’s contention that he worked, in essence, as an informant for the US government. Not one of those former agents, who asked that their names not be revealed, considered it out of the realm of possibility that Zambada Niebla might have cut a deal with the US government.

In fact, one former DEA agent said that by making such a claim, Zambada Niebla was essentially putting his life in jeopardy by outing himself as an informant, an extreme move that would seem to indicate that at least he believes he had a deal in place.

But, in the end, all of the former federal agents agree that unless Zambada Niebla has proof of his allegations that passes legal muster, he has little chance of prevailing — and at least one of those former agents said prosecutors would not likely have challenged him to produce such proof if they did not have a high degree of confidence that it does not exist.

A former FBI agent explained it this way:

The U. S. Attorney General Guidelines for Informants requires that there be a written document called an “otherwise criminal activities memo” signed by both parties. This document spells out exactly what the informant is authorized to do and tells him that he may be prosecuted for any other illegal activities. This should be provided to the defense in discovery; however, it does not always happen. Some attorneys are not aware of this and do not ask for it in discovery and the government does not willingly give it up.

I suspect that the government did not provide this document to the defense and that is why they are demanding that he provide proof of his status. … It would be very easy to prove what he was authorized to do by having the memo. [So] this may be a case of where the memo was never done….

The former DEA agent, who has extensive overseas experience, added:

My instincts say he was an informant. It’s [Zambada Niebla’s pleadings are] an effort to “scare” or “frighten” the government to dismiss or reduce charges. Posturing, as it were. But there is a substantial risk for him. It’s pretty much a last ditch effort. Were it otherwise, the defendant would not want to be exposed as having cooperated with the government agents. However, he will have an enormous challenge proving his allegations.

… An agent [or US government agency would approve such a cooperative relationship with a narco-trafficker] … so the agent can snag a higher-level trafficker and garner the resulting awards, commendations and promotions. Sometimes, there is outright bribery or gifts of value. It’s a win for the criminal informant because he may earn more money from trafficking and at the same time receive cash payments from the government for arrests he orchestrates. And that isn’t all: the informant’s own fear of arrest is reduced and he has a unique opportunity to effectively destroy his unwanted competition or archenemies.

And yet another DEA agent points out that “there is such an animal called an Attorney General-exempt operation, where the Attorney General of the United States [in the Zambada Niebla case, which allegedly dates back to at least 2004, it would have been the Bush administration’s Attorney General] could authorize that laws be violated [by an informant to advance a case].”

“This is usually done in money laundering investigations, however,” the DEA source said.

The other possibility, the former DEA agent adds, is that Zambada Niebla was tricked on an even deeper level, and was, in fact, not dealing with US law enforcement agencies, but rather a CIA intelligence operation.

“This would not be the first time CIA has used an informant and led them to believe it was an FBI, ICE or DEA operation,” the DEA source said.

If that is the case, the former DEA agent adds, Zambada Niebla’s case is sunk, since even if documents and other evidence exist to prove his allegations of US government complicity, that evidence would almost certainly be deep-sixed under claims of national security that would be invoked by that very same US government.

Stay tuned …..

Psychiatric Meds 101: A Surprising Discovery

Shane Ellison M. Sc.

I ask questions with period marks to shorten conversations. I avoid eye contact with strangers in fear (maybe it’s anxiety) that I might learn too much about them. I secretly think that Metallica would be making better music if they went back to bludgeoning themselves with party drugs and alcohol, instead of “therapy.” I’m trying to master the Law of Un-attraction to shield myself from a “real job,” small homes and junky cars. And, I’m constantly giving my children advice, only to give it to myself.

Psychiatry, can your drugs help me?

Perhaps these questions are what motivated me to pursue a career as a drug design chemist, winning multiple awards for my work. Nothing gets me more excited than drugs and how they affect the body (except my wife’s abs). I’ve studied their molecular anatomy, risked life and limb to mix and match explosive chemicals in a round bottom flask, and even sold my soul to Big Pharma in exchange for a lab bench and chemical hood.

During this time, I’ve made some surprising discoveries about psychiatric meds, which include antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants, and anti-anxiety drugs. Understanding what I’ve learned will protect you from the flood of side effects that are now being discovered at breakneck speeds, courtesy of the myriad of patients taking them in the name of mental health.

Your Own Personal Hell

Antidepressants strive to increase the levels of a “coping” molecule known as serotonin in the brain. It supposedly helps us find happiness when it’s covered in an avalanche of nastiness. But, it’s never been proven. Still, the drugs attempt to boost serotonin by “selectively” stopping the “reuptake” among brain cells. This is where the whole SSRI acronym came from – “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.” It’s a slick name, but a stupid idea. Nothing is selective in the body.

While trying to block the reuptake of serotonin, antidepressants can also prevent its release and that of another brain compound known as dopamine. The areas of the brain responsible for release and reuptake of these neurotransmitters are so damn similar (after all, they work on the same molecule) that an antidepressant drug isn’t smart enough to understand which one it is supposed to work on. So it does what any dumb drug would do, it blocks both. That’s why users usually carry a glassy stare in their eye. Fully under the psychiatric spell, they’ve tuned out.

Deep sadness, fear, anger and aggression can set in over time. By removing serotonin and dopamine from the brain, long-term antidepressant users can’t find or feel happiness. Instead, they may become buried in the avalanche of nastiness. And if you can’t find or feel happiness in life, what’s the point? What’s going to stop you from snapping your own neck or spraying bullets on your classmates? Not much when you live in your own personal antidepressant hell.

Think this is all opinion?

According to the FDA, antidepressants can cause suicidal thoughts and behavior, worsening depression, anxiety, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, impulsivity, aggression, psychotic episodes and violence. Some even cause homicidal ideation according to the manufacturers. Many long-term antidepressant users will tell you they no longer feel normal emotions—they’re numb, like zombies.

But the side effects of these drugs aren’t limited to hijacking your feelings and emotional state, causing violent and psychotic states. Physical side effects occur too and include abnormal bleeding, birth defects, heart attack, seizures and sudden death. Over one hundred and seventy drug regulatory warnings and studies have been issued on antidepressants, to sound the alarm on these side effects.

For Elephant Use Only

Psychiatrists prescribe antipsychotic meds such as Zyprexa and Seroquel, for anything from schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, delusional disorder, psychotic depression, autism or anything else they can think of, even “pervasive developmental disorder,” which is perfect for boosting sales because it targets children who suffer from irritability, aggression, and agitation. It’s a shame ‘cause these drugs are good for nothing but sedating irate elephants, not curing psychiatric disease.

According to a study published in Psychological Medicine, antipsychotic drugs cause brains to shrink – they lessen brain matter and volume. Originally designed for those deemed “schizophrenic,” the drug companies came up with a brilliant marketing campaign to sell these drugs to a much wider market—unsatisfied antidepressant users. You’ve probably seen the ads—if your “depression medication” isn’t working, then don’t blame the drug; you may just have bipolar disorder!”

Once swallowed, antipsychotics sail through the blood stream where they’re carried to the brain. Like a giant oil spill, antipsychotics cover the brain in a medicinal slick, where brain wave transmission is blocked. Users become devoid of normal brain activity. Motivation, drive and feelings of reward are shunted. If psychiatry considers this a “treatment,” they’re the crazy ones.

If you’ve ever seen someone who has suffered from the “spill” courtesy of following doctor’s orders, you can’t mistake one of the most common side effects, it’s called Akathisia. Involuntary movements, tics, jerks in the face and the entire body can become permanent side effects for antipsychotic users.

Antipsychotics also cause obesity, diabetes, stroke, cardiac events, respiratory problems, delusional thinking and psychosis. Drug regulators from the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa warn that they can also lead to death. I wouldn’t be surprised if psychiatrists considered this a cure…

Use This to Jump The Grand Canyon

If you’re going to attempt to jump your scooter over the Grand Canyon, or ride your snowboard off Kilimanjaro, stimulants are great. They flood the brain with dopamine and trigger an inhuman surge of adrenaline, responsible for making you believe life is grand, despite eminent death. Outside of that, you’re either a speed freak, a college student trying to learn an entire semester of Biology 101 in 4 hours, or a fifth grader “following doctor’s orders.”

Top stimulants being prescribed today are nothing more than a mix of amphetamines packaged into trade names like Adderall, Dexedrine and Ritalin. Street thugs sell it as meth, poor man’s cocaine, crystal, ice, glass and speed. It’s no wonder kids are now abusing Ritalin, Adderall and these drugs more than street drugs, they’re cheaper to get and they’re “legal,” hence the term kiddie cocaine.

Even the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) categorizes Ritalin in the Schedule ll category, meaning a high potential for abuse—just like cocaine and morphine. All of them have the same effects regardless of how they’re named: Central nervous system overload leading to heart attack and/or heart failure. And kids are dropping faster than Meth Heads at Raves…

I’m not exaggerating.

Eleven international drug regulatory agencies and our own FDA has issued warnings that stimulants like Ritalin cause addiction, depression, insomnia, drug dependence, mania, psychosis, heart problems, stroke and sudden death.

Bash Your Head in with Anti-Anxiety Drugs

If you’re not man enough for a drug that could sedate an elephant like antipsychotics, then psychiatrists will prescribe anti-anxiety meds, particularly benzodiazepines. Choosing between the two is akin to deciding whether or not you should be hit in the head with an aluminum bat or a wooden one; anti-anxiety meds being the latter.

Discovered in the stinky chemistry labs of Hoffman La Roche in 1955, anti-anxiety meds aim to trigger sleep receptors in the brain, just slightly. So, rather than being riddled with anxiety, you are put to sleep, halfway. It’s “treatment,” and psychiatrists have been “practicing it for decades.” But, it has yet to work, because drugging your problems away is more dangerous than anxiety. The use of anti-anxiety meds is coupled with a host of nasty side effects such as seizures, aggression and violence once the drug wears off. Hallucinations, delusional thinking, confusion, abnormal behavior, hostility, agitation, irritability, depression and suicidal thinking are all possible outcomes according to Big Pharma’s heavily guarded research papers.

Getting off the drugs could be harder than abandoning a heroin addiction. Some have described withdrawal from “benzos” being akin to pulling hundreds of fish hooks out of their skin, without anesthesia. If you doubt their addictive nature, go to Google search and type in a few of the leading anti-anxiety drugs like Klonopin or Xanax and here is what you’ll find:

“Klonopin withdrawal” 1,860,000 results
“Xanax withdrawal” 1,980,000 results
Exposing Psychiatry: How to Get The Truth

In total, the side effects of psychiatric meds spread far and wide. And most are hidden from patients and doctors alike. Fortunately, Citizens Commission on Human Rights has solved this problem with a state-of-the-art database that allows people to search through the adverse reaction reports sent to the FDA on psychiatric drugs. It also provides international drug regulatory agency warnings and studies published on the side effects of the drugs.

So, can psychiatry help me? No. And that’s surprising because psychiatric meds are some of the biggest selling drugs, poised to seal the hopes and dreams of millions. Regardless of what mental state I might be in (or anyone else for that matter), there is not a single drug that cures, treats or solves the perceived problems of mental health.

While people can suffer miserably from emotional or mental duress that can hinder their lifestyle, the pseudo-science of psychiatry has yet to solve any of these problems, and in fact only contributes to poor health as seen by the wide array of side effects. Marketing campaigns and ghostwritten medical journals are designed to obscure these facts. But the psychiatric drug side effect database courtesy of CCHR ensures that all patients have access to the truth, to the documented facts, which could save their life or that of a loved one.