ABZ IZ BACK!!!

But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Isaiah 28:13

Home
About Us
News
criminal wars of aggressi
Crimes against humanity
NEW WORLD ORDER
The Money Changers
They Thought They Were Fr
Jesus Son Of Mary
Thy Kingdom Come
Youtube Vids
Power?
Quran
Site Map
Contact Us

 FROM WIKIPEDIA

 

(you will notice how views, quotes and solid facts are very different, but we as humans are very easily steered by views and screened "quotes" - and tend to leave the stark facts behind)

 

 

Opium production in Afghanistan from 1994 - 2007

Opium

 

Opium poppies have traditionally been grown in Afghanistan, and, with the war shattering other sectors of the economy, it became the number one export of the country.

 

The Taliban have provided an Islamic sanction for farmers ... to grow even more opium, even though the Koran forbids Muslims from producing or imbibing intoxicants. Abdul Rashid, the head of the Taliban's anti-drugs control force in Kandahar, spelled out the nature of his unique job. He is authorized to impose a strict ban on the growing of hashish, "because it is consumed by Afghans and Muslims." But, Rashid told me without a hint of sarcasm, "Opium is permissible because it is consumed by kafirs in the West and not by Muslims or Afghans."[71]

 

But in 2000 the Taliban banned opium production, a first in Afghan history. In 2000, Afghanistan's opium production still accounted for 75% of the world's supply. On July 27, 2000, the Taliban again issued a decree banning opium poppy cultivation. According to opioids.com, by February 2001, production had been reduced from 12,600 acres (51 km2) to only 17 acres.[72] When the Taliban entered north Waziristan in 2003 they immediately banned poppy cultivation and punished those who sold it.[citation needed]

Another source claims opium prod

uction was cut back by the Taliban not to prevent its use but to shore up its price, and thus increase the income of poppy farmers and revenue of Afghan tax collectors.[73]

 

The official verdict of the Taliban however was otherwise. Mullah Amir Mohammed Haqqani, the Taliban's top drug official in Nangarhar, said the ban would remain regardless of whether the Taliban received aid or international "recognition". "It is our decree that there will be no poppy cultivation. It is banned forever in this country," he said. "Whether we get assistance or not, poppy growing will never be allowed again in our country."[72]

 

However, with the 2001 US/Northern Alliance expulsion of the Taliban, opium cultivation has increased in the southern provinces liberated from the Taliban control,[74] and by 2005 production was 87% of the world's opium supply,[75] rising to 90% in 2006.[76]


 

Exclusive footage shows British soldiers in Afghanistan being told to leave heroin plants alone

By MARK NICOL
Last updated at 12:27 29 July 2007

Dramatic film shot has revealed that British troops in Afghanistan are told to leave heroin-producing opium crops untouched - contradicting Government claims it is committed to wiping out the drug.

The footage shows soldiers fighting the Taliban in a field of opium poppies.

One admits he wants to throw a grenade into "their beloved" plants, but says he would get "the telling-off of a lifetime".

The MoD said last night it was not the troops' role to destroy crops but to provide security so farmers could be "encouraged to grow alternatives".

 

 

TIME.COM

Holding Fire in the Opium War?

By Aryn Baker/Kabul Tuesday, May. 01, 2007

A British soldier stands in a poppy field in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, April, 2007

Rafiq Mazbool / AP

 

The backfiring of a NATO advertising campaign in southern Afghanistan illustrates the complexity of fighting an insurgency partly fueled by an illicit drug economy. For the past month the Western alliance's International Security Assistance Force, tasked with restoring Afghanistan's security and protecting its reconstruction effort, have been running a series of radio ads suggesting that local farmers would no longer be punished for growing opium poppies. NATO hoped its security effort would get better cooperation from the local population if its mission was separated from that of a widely resented poppy-eradication program. But the advertisements muddied the Afghan Government's unambiguous anti-narcotics message, which had just started to take root. "ISAF's message over the radio was a mistake," fumes Counter Narcotics minister Habibullah Qaderi. "What they said was a clear deviation from the Afghan government's policy against narcotics, "which is banned in Afghanistan."

 

 

The campaign, which also included leaflets dropped throughout the province of Helmand, Afghanistan's center of opium production, told farmers, "The ANA [Afghan National Army] forces and ISAF forces will not eradicate your poppies, because ANA and ISAF forces know that the people there have no other income, that is why they are cultivating poppies." Last week the campaign was pulled after the complaints of several Afghan government leaders, but the damage may already be done. "We cannot bulldoze every field in Afghanistan. But we must always have the threat that we might eradicate the fields in order to have an impact," says Qaderi. "ISAF's message takes away that threat."

 

"encouraged to grow alternatives".

 

below are some short related videos :

 

now watch the way they both laugh to lighten the mood

and then change the subject dramatically,

also note the way the interviewer

immediately comes in to assist them when it starts becoming obvious.

 

 

From: from thewilderness.com 

- In this most outrageous propaganda of all, the Indian news service PTI in New Delhi, published a story on October 4 2001, headlined, "Laden Planned to Wreak Havoc in U.S. Through Super Heroin." It's lead paragraph reads:

"The most wanted terrorist Osama bin Laden had planned to develop a 'super heroin' drug and export the same to United States and West Europe to wreak havoc there much before the deadly September 11 attacks. 'The terror network headed by Osama bin Laden has tried to develop a high-strength form of heroin that it planned to export to United States and Western Europe," a major American daily said today quoting intelligence reports."

This is the most patent b.s. I have ever read. I specialized in heroin at LAPD. I was also trained by the DEA in 1976. There is no such thing as super heroin. Heroin is a chemical, diacetyl morphine. Its purest form is 100%. It is usually "cut" at least four times - each time by 50% - to 6.25% purity or less before it is sold on the streets. There is no way to make it stronger unless you just cut it less, which automatically cuts the profits to street vendors. And it is the middlemen and retailers who do the cutting, not the manufacturer. It is easier to smuggle one kilo of pure heroin from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan or Pakistan or Turkey than it is to smuggle eight kilos at 6.25%. It would take eight times as many airplanes and trucks.

Each time a middleman cuts the heroin he has twice as much to sell.

This lie of a story implies that Osama bin Laden controls street-level drug dealing in the United States from the black ghettos of New York and L.A to the white suburbs of San Francisco and Chicago. That's the only way it is possible to get a higher-strength heroin on the streets of America.

 

Rewind to 3min:50s

Listen carefully to how she admits that the Taliban is against opium as it is against Islam.

And at 3min:10s the fact that they knew how much opium each farmer could produce - and if anyone in a village failed to deliver the right kg of opium - the whole village would lose it's license.

this is farcical, since opium is already in over-production since the invasion (2.5 years more than the amount required for global heroin abuse) with huge stockpiles all over Afghanistan, and one would assume that this was more than enough for a few centuries of "medicinal use".

And the suggestion of rape is also quite fantastic as the western media are constantly demonizing them for their strict religious adherence and for stoning adulterers.

 

from wikipedia:

 

Punishment was severe. Theft was punished by the amputation of a hand, rape and murder by public execution, and married adulterers were stoned to death. In Kabul, punishments including executions were carried out in front of crowds in the city's former soccer stadium.[64]

Emergence

The most credible story of how Mullah Omar first mobilized his followers is that in the spring of 1994 Singesar neighbors told him that a warlord commander had abducted two teenage girls, shaved their heads and taken them to a camp where they were raped repeatedly.

30 Taliban (with only 16 rifles) freed the girls and hanged the commander from the barrel of a tank.

Later that year two warlord commanders killed civilians while fighting for the right to sodomize a young boy. The Taliban freed him.[26][27]

The Taliban's first major military activity was in 1994 when they marched northward from Maiwand and captured Kandahar City and the surrounding provinces, losing only a few dozen men.[28] They captured a border crossing at Spin Baldak and an ammunition dump from warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar on October 29. Kandahar fell November 3–5. A few weeks later they freed "a convoy trying to open a trade route from Pakistan to Central Asia" from another group of warlords attempting to extort money for permission to pass their checkpoints. The convoy owners, known as the "transport mafia" paid a large fee and promised ongoing payments for this service.[29]

[edit]Consolidation

Over the next three months this hitherto unknown force took control of twelve of 34 provinces, disarming the "heavily armed population". Warlords often surrendered without a fight.[22] By September 1996 they had captured Afghanistan's capital, Kabul. In newly conquered towns hundreds of religious police beat offenders with long sticks.[30]

 

Afghanistan, Opium and the Taliban


JALALABAD, Afghanistan (February 15, 2001 8:19 p.m. EST

U.N. drug control officers said the Taliban religious militia has nearly wiped out opium production in Afghanistan -- once the world's largest producer -- since banning poppy cultivation last summer.

A 12-member team from the U.N. Drug Control Program spent two weeks searching most of the nation's largest opium-producing areas and found so few poppies that they do not expect any opium to come out of Afghanistan this year.

"We are not just guessing. We have seen the proof in the fields," said Bernard Frahi, regional director for the U.N. program in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He laid out photographs of vast tracts of land cultivated with wheat alongside pictures of the same fields taken a year earlier -- a sea of blood-red poppies.

A State Department official said Thursday all the information the United States has received so far indicates the poppy crop had decreased, but he did not believe it was eliminated.

Last year, Afghanistan produced nearly 4,000 tons of opium, about 75 percent of the world's supply, U.N. officials said. Opium -- the milky substance drained from the poppy plant -- is converted into heroin and sold in Europe and North America. The 1999 output was a world record for opium production, the United Nations said -- more than all other countries combined, including the "Golden Triangle," where the borders of Thailand, Laos and Myanmar meet.

Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban's supreme leader, banned poppy growing before the November planting season and augmented it with a religious edict making it contrary to the tenets of Islam.

The Taliban, which has imposed a strict brand of Islam in the 95 percent of Afghanistan it controls, has set fire to heroin laboratories and jailed farmers until they agreed to destroy their poppy crops.

The U.N. surveyors, who completed their search this week, crisscrossed Helmand, Kandahar, Urzgan and Nangarhar provinces and parts of two others -- areas responsible for 86 percent of the opium produced in Afghanistan last year, Frahi said in an interview Wednesday. They covered 80 percent of the land in those provinces that last year had been awash in poppies.

This year they found poppies growing on barely an acre here and there, Frahi said. The rest -- about 175,000 acres -- was clean.

"We have to look at the situation with careful optimism," said Sandro Tucci of the U.N. Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention in Vienna, Austria.

He said indications are that no poppies were planted this season and that, as a result, there hasn't been any production of opium -- but that officials would keep checking.

The State Department counternarcotics official said the department would make its own estimate of the poppy crop. Information received so far suggests there will be a decrease, but how much is not yet clear, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"We do not think by any stretch of the imagination that poppy cultivation in Afghanistan has been eliminated. But we, like the rest of the world, welcome positive news."

The Drug Enforcement Administration declined to comment.

No U.S. government official can enter Afghanistan because of security concerns stemming from the presence of suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden.

Poppies are harvested in March and April, which is why the survey was done now. Tucci said it would have been impossible for the poppies to have been harvested already.

The areas searched by the U.N. surveyors are the most fertile lands under Taliban control. Other areas, though they are somewhat fertile, have not traditionally been poppy growing areas and farmers are struggling to raise any crops at all because of severe drought. The rest of the land held by the Taliban is mountainous or desert, where poppies could not grow.

Karim Rahimi, the U.N. drug control liaison in Jalalabad, capital of Nangarhar province, said farmers were growing wheat or onions in fields where they once grew poppies.

"It is amazing, really, when you see the fields that last year were filled with poppies and this year there is wheat," he said.

The Taliban enforced the ban by threatening to arrest village elders and mullahs who allowed poppies to be grown. Taliban soldiers patrolled in trucks armed with rocket-propelled grenade launchers. About 1,000 people in Nangarhar who tried to defy the ban were arrested and jailed until they agreed to destroy their crops.

Signs throughout Nangarhar warn against drug production and use, some calling it an "illicit phenomenon." Another reads: "Be drug free, be happy."

Last year, poppies grew on 12,600 acres of land in Nangarhar province. According to the U.N. survey, poppies were planted on only 17 acres there this season and all were destroyed by the Taliban.

"The Taliban have done their work very seriously," Frahi said.

But the ban has badly hurt farmers in one of the world's poorest countries, shattered by two decades of war and devastated by drought.

Ahmed Rehman, who shares less than three acres in Nangarhar with his three brothers, said the opium he produced last year on part of the land brought him $1,100.

This year, he says, he will be lucky to get $300 for the onions and cattle feed he planted on the entire parcel.

"Life is very bad for me this year," he said. "Last year I was able to buy meat and wheat and now this year there is nothing."

But Rehman said he never considered defying the ban.

"The Taliban were patrolling all the time. Of course I was afraid. I did not want to go to jail and lose my freedom and my dignity," he said, gesturing with dirt-caked hands.

Shams-ul-Haq Sayed, an officer of the Taliban drug control office in Jalalabad, said farmers need international aid.

"This year was the most important for us because growing poppies was part of their culture, and the first years are always the most difficult," he said.

Tucci said discussions are under way on how to help the farmers.

Western diplomats in Pakistan have suggested the Taliban is simply trying to drive up the price of opium they have stockpiled. The State Department official also said Afghanistan could do more by destroying drug stockpiles and heroin labs and arresting producers and traffickers.

Frahi dismissed that as "nonsense" and said it is drug traffickers and shopkeepers who have stockpiles. Two pounds of opium worth $35 last year are now worth as much as $360, he said.

Mullah Amir Mohammed Haqqani, the Taliban's top drug official in Nangarhar, said the ban would remain regardless of whether the Taliban received aid or international recognition.

"It is our decree that there will be no poppy cultivation. It is banned forever in this country," he said. "Whether we get assistance or not, poppy growing will never be allowed again in our country.


A full video of the murder of these people can be found at the bottom of this page
 
 
 

The Lure of Opium Wealth Is a Potent Force in Afghanistan Western officials warn of a nascent narco state as drug traffickers act with impunity, some allegedly with the support of top officials

By Paul Watson
Times Staff Writer

May 28, 2005

Kunduz, Afghanistan.

Like a  frustrated hunter, the head of the local anti-drug squad keeps snapshots of the ones who "got away".

One photo shows a prisoner wearing a flat, round pakol hat, standing in front of 10 pounds of opium packaged in plastic bags laid out on a table. Lt. Nyamatullah Nyamat took the picture on the February day he arrested the suspect. Hours later, the man was freed.

The stocky, plain-spoken cop glumly tossed another photo onto a desk in his basement office as if playing a losing hand of cards. In this one, a man in a white pillbox cap is handcuffed to a police officer and standing next to 62 pounds of opium. A local judge sentenced him to 10 years in prison. A higher court ordered his release.

One of Nyamat's biggest catches, arrested with 114 pounds of heroin, a derivative of opium, hadn't even appeared in court when the local prosecutor let him go in late March.

Nyamat said that was normal in Kunduz, a hub on one of the world's busiest drug-smuggling routes.

Three and a half years after the United States led an invasion of Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime, the United Nations and the U.S. government warn that the country is in danger of becoming a narco-state controlled by traffickers. The State Department recently called the Afghan drug trade "an enormous threat to world stability." The United Nations estimates that Afghanistan produces 87% of the world's opium.

For decades, poor farmers trying to make a living in Afghanistan's mountain valleys have harvested the opium poppies that feed the world's drug pipeline. Now the trade is booming, partly the result of the U.S. strategy for overthrowing the Taliban and stabilizing the country after two decades of war.

U.S. troops forged alliances with warlords, who provided ground forces in the battle against the Taliban. Some of those allies are suspected of being among Afghanistan's biggest drug traffickers, controlling networks that include producers, criminal gangs and even members of the counter-narcotics police force. They are willing to make deals with remnants of the Taliban if the price is right.

The U.S.-backed Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has brought some of those warlords into his popularly elected government, a recognition of their political clout and a calculated risk that keeping them close might make it easier to control them.

"Drug money is absolutely supporting terrorist groups," said Alexandre Schmidt, deputy head of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime in Afghanistan. And regardless of their allegiance, Schmidt said, most suspects are released within 48 hours because of intervention by higher authorities.

Kunduz, in northeastern Afghanistan, is one of the front lines in what Karzai calls a holy war on drugs. It is just a 90-minute drive from the border with Tajikistan, where low-grade smack starts the next leg of its journey to the streets of Europe.

Nyamat says that as fast as he and his men can catch the smugglers, corrupt officials spring them. Many others are untouchable because they have important friends.

Nyamat carries a handwritten list, four neatly folded pages held together with a pin, to record his losing score. Reading it recently, he shook his head in disgust. Only three of 17 suspects arrested this year were still in prison.

"We have the complete ID list of all smugglers ... but we cannot arrest them because they have the power now, not us," he said.

The list of those suspected of involvement in the drug trade

reaches high into Karzai's government.

Nyamat and an Afghan trafficker singled out Gen. Mohammed Daoud,

a former warlord who is Afghanistan's deputy interior minister

in charge of the anti-drug effort.

An official of a human rights commission in eastern Afghanistan said police in Nangarhar province routinely ignore drug traffickers and other well-connected criminals, even though they take a strict stand against poppy growing. The provincial police are under the command of Hazrat Ali, a warlord who provided the bulk of the Afghan ground force that aided U.S. soldiers in the attempt to capture Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora in late 2001.

Daoud and Ali deny the charges.

U.S. allies are not the only ones reaping the drug bonanza. Taliban guerrillas also have a share in the opium and heroin trade, which the United Nations estimates is worth $3 billion a year. Warlords who once fought them collect a tax on drug shipments heading to Iran, Pakistan or Tajikistan. As long as the Taliban pay cash, they are pleased to let bygones be bygones, said police and two drug traffickers who claimed to have done business with the militants.

Some drug barons have changed their ways because they have already made millions of dollars and now see their self-interest in reform and politics, said a senior Western official involved in the anti-drug effort.

"Others are still involved in drug trafficking and today are part — at the highest level — of government," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "The idea is not to leave them in the provinces anymore, but to bring them on board in official positions in order to better control them."

But the official said he doubted the strategy would work.

Still, the U.N. and the Afghan government predict that this year's opium harvest will be at least 30% smaller than the record 4,200 tons in 2004, partly because of a more aggressive eradication effort. The law of supply and demand has helped too. A glut has driven down prices and profits. But this year's smaller harvest is expected to push prices back up and encourage more planting and trafficking.

It is crucial for the Afghan government and foreign donors to deliver hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to farmers before the next planting season this year to make it unnecessary for them to grow opium poppies, said Schmidt, the U.N. official. Sufficient money has been pledged, but some governments have failed to make good on their promises, he said. And continuing insecurity in large parts of the country makes development work difficult.

Schmidt said he was certain that the poppy crop this year would be smaller than last year's. "But the question is 2006."

More than 2,000 years ago, much of Kunduz was a swamp. Alexander the Great stopped here for fresh horses as he pressed south in 329 BC in his conquest of much of the known world.

Today it's a dust-blown smugglers' paradise.

As they have for generations, horses decorated with small pompoms and bells clip-clop through the city, pulling carts that are used as taxis. The police chief of Kunduz province, former militia commander Gen. Mutaleb Baig, is also a throwback to the old Afghanistan. Instead of a police uniform, he prefers a green quilted coat, which he drapes over his shoulders like a chieftain's cloak.

In late 2001, U.S. Special Forces and Central Intelligence Agency operatives worked with the Northern Alliance rebel group to besiege thousands of Taliban soldiers in Kunduz. The fight to take the city helped form close ties between U.S. forces and warlord Daoud, who had been finance secretary to Ahmed Shah Massoud, the Northern Alliance leader who was assassinated two days before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Before the attacks and the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, State Department officials had often cited Northern Alliance drug trafficking as one reason the U.S. should not publicly support the anti-Taliban militia.

But police and traffickers interviewed in Kunduz said Daoud did more than use narcotics to help fund the fight against the Taliban: He made drug smuggling a family business. They said he continued to profit from the opium and heroin trade even after Karzai brought him into the central government last August.

Nyamat, a former intelligence agent who has been on the police force for 25 years, accused Daoud's brother, Haji Agha, of handling the family drug business for Daoud, and he said that when his men arrested small-scale smugglers, the deputy minister had them released.

Nyamat, whose almond-shaped eyes are reminiscent of Genghis Khan's Mongols, who swept through Afghanistan in the 13th century, said four of his own officers moonlight for drug traffickers. Even counting them, his unit is 15 officers short of full strength.

He got up from his desk in a basement office of the Kunduz police station, closed two small windows, and lowered his voice. He said he couldn't trust anyone, least of all provincial chief Baig, a former deputy to Daoud.

Nyamat alleged that Baig's officers had undermined his efforts by rationing gas and refusing to provide armed backup during drug raids. Baig has fired him four times. The commander of the anti-drug force in Kabul keeps reinstating him.

Nyamat said he had reported his suspicions several times to his superiors, and in November he approached American officials working with the counter-narcotics police in Kabul. When nothing resulted from the discussions, he sent a trusted deputy to the Afghan capital to complain again in late February.

Daoud denied involvement in the drug trade but said other senior government officials, police and militia commanders were guilty of it.

He said in an interview that he and his brother had never had anything to do with opium or heroin, and said no Northern Alliance commander had ever trafficked narcotics, because Massoud did not tolerate it. He accused enemies of spreading lies about him.

"If there is even one [drug] case that I'm involved in, I am ready to be punished," Daoud said.

Western officials involved in the anti-drug effort said privately that Daoud was once a trafficker but that they now trusted him as a committed leader in the fight against narcotics.

"Gen. Daoud is absolutely a key element in the eradication effort," said Schmidt, the U.N. official.

The United Nations estimates that Afghan opium, morphine and heroin feed the habits of 10 million addicts, or two-thirds of the world's opiate abusers. Afghan narcotics kill about 10,000 people a year, it says. Europe is the most lucrative market.

Until last year, Afghanistan was known as an opium exporter, not a major heroin producer. But with the poppy boom, and post-Taliban instability, small heroin labs sprang up in hundreds of villages. Even if police find them, they are easily replaced.

One Kunduz trafficker, a man in his late 20s with a wool hat resting high on his head, said an average lab had 10 barrels, a pressing machine, cotton filters and acetic anhydride, an acid, to refine opium paste into heroin powder.

The trafficker estimated that there was enough opium stashed in village wells and other hiding places to keep labs and smugglers working for 10 to 15 years, even if poppy cultivation stopped entirely. Schmidt said that was probably an underestimation.

Early last year, Karzai set up the paramilitary Special Narcotics Force, which answers only to him and his interior minister. Officials refused to provide details on its size and capabilities.

The Interior Ministry says the force carried out 12 operations in three of the country's 34 provinces last year, destroying 70 labs and 88 tons of opiates — about 2% of Afghanistan's production.

In late February, Afghan forces and American advisors from the Drug Enforcement Administration delivered 1.5 tons of heroin, opium and hashish to the counter-narcotics police headquarters in Kabul. The drugs were seized from homes and shops during three months of raids in southern Helmand province, said Muhibullah Ludin, a senior official in the newly formed Counter-Narcotics Ministry.

"It wasn't very well hidden because it's so common there," he said. "Right now they're trying to make it a bit more secret because so many people are being detained."

In the lobby of the police station, officers laid out a long row of burlap and plastic sacks, several stained with gooey black opium gum, and weighed each sack on a freight scale in the corner. They also spilled out individual plastic bags packed with almost pure heroin, an off-white powder that looks like flour, to count them on the floor. There were 559 one-kilo bags — more than 1,200 pounds.

It seemed an impressive haul, but DEA advisors watched the count skeptically.

"Trying to get rid of drugs in Afghanistan is like trying to clear sand from a beach with a bucket," said an American counter-narcotics agent.

The three-month operation resulted in charges against only one trafficker, Ludin said. A Western diplomat involved in the effort said that the special force had not gone after the people behind the drug networks yet because the justice system was too weak.

"We find it difficult to get any successful prosecutions of any significant traffickers, basically because people pay bribes," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

With foreign assistance, the Afghan government is setting up special courts to try traffickers, with added security to protect investigators, prosecutors and judges. They will start with low-level cases and gradually move up the drug trafficking chain as they gain confidence, the Western official said.

Judges are easily bribed because they earn only about $100 a month, Schmidt said.

"We'll be monitoring it very, very carefully in order to respond to any problems in the prosecution of these cases," he said. "But I cannot tell you today that everything will be utterly beautiful and perfect."

The Kunduz trafficker said he wasn't worried.

He counts Daoud as one of his connections. Late in the summer of 2003, he said, Daoud helped him retrieve heroin worth $200,000 that had been seized at the Salang Tunnel, a link between southern and northern Afghanistan that is 11,000 feet up in the Hindu Kush mountains. Daoud denied this, saying drugs were never seized at the tunnel and that the trafficker was lying.

The trafficker also said he had sold a large consignment of heroin last year that had yet to be smuggled into Iran from the southwestern province of Nimroz. Premium Afghan heroin going to the West through Iran fetches a higher price and is less likely to be seized.

He predicted that the government crackdown would be good for business. Increased arrests and interdiction would cut competition and reduce the glut that forced down prices by two-thirds last year.

"The more restrictions, the more the business will boom," the trafficker said. "The price will go high, the number of dealers will go down, and my income will go up. The professional businessmen will remain. They have good connections. Whoever works hard in a business wins."

No matter where Afghan narcotics are headed, most of them pass through Kabul, a transit point on the main route linking poppy fields and labs in east and north to border smuggling routes.

Each day, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., police set up checkpoints on the edge of the capital. They ask drivers the "Seven Golden Questions," taught by British advisors, which include where are they coming from, where are they going and who owns the vehicle. They try to form a hunch about whether they should conduct a search.

A sniffer dog named Warsola, a German shepherd trained in Kazakhstan to take commands in Pashto, stands by in a cage, eager to root out hidden drugs. The police also have a camera probe, a long black hose with a tiny lens on the tip, which allows them to peer into gas tanks and radiators.

But at the end of the day, the outmatched police, paid $60 a month, lock up their weapons, go home and wait for death threats. They worry about their families.

"When I leave my house I tell my children, 'Please don't go out.' And I tell them, 'If you need anything, please tell me. I will bring it to you,' " Mohammed Nazir said. "We are afraid.

"Even if a cat jumps into my house, I get scared and I think that there is somebody in the house to kill me."

Nazir's 13-member team has arrested more than 30 suspected drug traffickers since it started work nine months ago. The team's first bust was of uniformed police officers armed with hand grenades and guns. They were caught with 24 pounds of opium in a knapsack in a civilian car. They said they had no idea that the drugs were there, Nazir said.

One of the unit's most dangerous arrests was last summer, when it discovered more than 400 pounds of opium concealed in the cabin of a gas tanker coming from northern Afghanistan. The smuggler had tried to mask the musky opium smell with piles of melons.

When police confronted the driver, he used his cellphone to call for help. Then he offered a bribe, and when that didn't work, he invoked the name of Gen. Haji Mohammed Almas, a Northern Alliance warlord, whose forces are suspected in many robberies and killings in the capital.

On the way to jail with their suspects, the police noticed that they were being followed by two SUVs full of gunmen. They kept their distance when the drug squad officers pulled into the jail, said Shamsuddin, a member of Nazir's unit. Like many Afghans, he uses only one name.

That night, about 1 a.m., a phone call woke him. Lying next to his wife, Shamsuddin began sweating in anger as a voice on the phone threatened him, he recalled.

"I was sweating just because he wasn't next to me," the cop snarled. "Otherwise I would have beaten him to death."

A few days later, when Shamsuddin was sitting with other officers at the drug squad's headquarters, the same man called and repeated the threat.

Nazir said traffickers had no trouble finding phone numbers to harangue counter-narcotics police at any hour. "All of these people have friends inside the government," he said.

A week after their arrest, the truck driver and his assistant walked free and drove off in their tanker.

Almas, the warlord, denied that he trafficked in drugs and declared that the police were hopelessly corrupt.

"In reality, the police are very sleepy in Kabul," he said. "And that is because all the thieves and criminals have joined the National Police. Whenever they commit a crime ... they name a [militia] commander and say that his men did this."

Like many in the front-line drug squad, Shamsuddin, a 23-year police veteran, is angry that warlords with a long record of crimes and abuses in the country's wars have been promoted to top police positions, putting uniformed officers at their mercy.

"I can only trust these 12 people in my team," he said. "Our government is not a real government. I pray and hope for a day that we have a foreigner as a boss, and he is standing over our heads and controlling us. There is no management in our government and there is no authority from the Afghans."

East of Kabul, in one of Afghanistan's oldest opium-producing regions, Karzai has tried to resolve the police-warlord conflict by melding the two in the person of Hazrat Ali.

Western officials praise the Nangarhar police chief for his strict stand against poppy growing. Cultivation has been cut drastically in a region where spring usually brings fields full of red and white opium poppy flowers.

But Jandad Spin Ghar, who leads the eastern regional office of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, said Ali's police routinely arrested innocent people and committed other serious abuses while letting drug traffickers and other well-connected criminals go free.

"He only stopped the cultivation and he has done nothing to stop the trafficking," Spin Ghar said. "I don't understand why the U.S. and the central government are supporting him."

Daoud, the deputy interior minister, said he had summoned Ali to Kabul to answer such allegations, and was satisfied that they were false. Ali accused enemies of spreading lies about him.

"I told him, 'Look, General, I have never been in the drug business my whole life,' " Ali recalled. "I hate drugs more than anything else and neither I nor my men are involved in the drug business."

Part of the solution to Afghanistan's drug problem may lie in the soft petals and sweet scent of the Bulgarian rose. A German aid group has persuaded a dozen farmers in one Nangarhar village to grow them to see whether they can provide the essence for fine French perfumes.

Janaan Khan, a village leader in Dara-e-Noor, planted 150 rose seedlings on half an acre. They poke just a few inches out of the wet soil, which once provided bumper harvests of premium red opium. He earned about $4,000 from his last poppy crop in 2002, a fortune in a country where per capita income in 2003 was about $200, putting it among the bottom 20 nations.

It's more difficult to produce high-quality rose oil than high-grade opium, and German experts told Khan that it would take three years to find out what, if anything, their Bulgarian roses are worth.

A stiff wind can bruise the blossoms, rendering them worthless. At harvest time, farmers have just one day to gently pluck the flowers and process them into rose oil, Khan said. At most, he expects to earn a quarter of what he did from opium. But he says that would be enough for an honest living.

"I told the farmers that if this thing succeeds, then Afghanistan will be famous for flowers and perfumes, not for war and opium, and Dara-e-Noor will be as famous as Paris," Khan said, his eyes lighting up with the dream.

"I told them that these flowers will have great smell and foreigners will come from all over the world for a picnic. And they will enjoy being here. And everywhere you look there will be foreigners, and we will build guest houses and take money from the foreigners who stay here. And we will all be rich."

Despite his outward confidence, Khan acknowledged that he was worried he might be wrong. The German aid group has promised a small cash subsidy to tide the farmers over, but Khan said it was far less than the thousands of dollars they were used to earning. They probably will wait only a year or two before they start growing opium poppies again, he said.

 

 

 

First Opium War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
First Opium War
Part of the Opium Wars

Date1839–1842
LocationChina
ResultDecisive British victory; Treaty of Nanjing
Territorial
changes
Hong Kong ceded to United Kingdom
Belligerents
Qing China British East India Company
Commanders
Daoguang Emperor
Lin Zexu
Charles Elliot
Anthony Blaxland Stransham

The First Opium War or the First Anglo-Chinese War was fought between the British East India Company and the Qing Dynasty in China from 1839 to 1842 with the aim of forcing China to allow free trade, particularly in opium. The Treaty of Nanking, first of the unequal treaties, granted an indemnity to Britain, opening of five Treaty Ports, and the cession of Hong Kong, ending the monopoly of trading in the Canton System. The wars are often cited as the end of China's isolation and the beginning of modern Chinese history.

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Background

During the 19th century, trading in goods from China was extremely lucrative for Europeans and Chinese merchants alike. Due to the Qing Dynasty's trade restrictions, whereby international trade was only allowed to take place in Canton (Guangzhou) conducted by imperially sanctioned monopolies, it became uneconomic to trade in low-value manufactured consumer products that the average Chinese could buy from the British like the Indians did.

Instead, the Sino-British trade became dominated by high-value luxury items such as tea (from China to Britain) and silver (from Britain to China), to the extent that European specie metals became widely used in China. Britain had been on the gold standard since the 18th century, so it had to purchase silver from continental Europe to supply the Chinese appetite for silver, which was a costly process at a time before demonetization of silver by Germany in the 1870s. In casting about for other possible commodities to reverse the flow of silver out of the country and into China, the British discovered opium. Opium as a medicinal ingredient was documented in texts as early as the Ming dynasty but its recreational use was limited and there were laws in place against its abuse. It was with the mass quantities introduced by the British motivated by the equalization of trade that the drug became prevalent. British importation of opium in large amounts began in 1781 and between 1821 and 1837 import increased fivefold. The drug was produced in the traditionally cotton growing regions of India (under British government monopoly (Bengal) and in the Princely states (Malwa) and was sold on the condition that it be shipped by British traders to China. The Qing government had largely ignored the problem until the drug had spread widely in Chinese society.

Alarmed by the reverse in silver flow and the epidemic of addiction (an estimated 2 million Chinese were habitual users[1]), the Qing government attempted to end the opium trade, but its efforts were complicated by corrupt local officials (including the Viceroy of Canton). In one isolated incident, in 1818, the Laurel carried word to Sydney of a US ship laden with opium and treasure which was invaded by Chinese pirates. The crew of the US vessel had all been killed, but for the escaping first mate, who later identified the pirates to the authorities. In 1839, the Qing Emperor appointed Lin Zexu as the governor of Canton with the goal of reducing and eliminating the Opium trade. On his arrival, Lin Zexu banned the sale of opium, asked that all opium be surrendered to the Chinese authorities, and asked that all foreign traders sign a 'no opium trade' bond the breaking of which was punishable by death. He also forced the British hand by closing the channel to Canton, effectively holding British traders hostage in Canton. The British Chief Superintendent of Trade in China, Charles Elliot (who, surprisingly, broke the blockade to arrive in Canton) got the British traders to agree to hand over their opium stock with the promise of eventual compensation for their loss from the British Government. (This promise, and the inability of the British government to pay it without causing a political storm, was an important cause for the subsequent British action.) [2] Overall 20,000 chests [3] each holding about 120 pounds[4]) were handed over and destroyed in May 1839. Following the collection and destruction of the opium, Lin Zexu wrote a "memorial" (摺奏)[5] to the Queen of Great Britain in an unsuccessful attempt to stop the trade of the drug, as it had poisoned thousands of Chinese civilians (the memorial never reached the Queen).

History of Hong Kong
Timeline

    Prehistoric
    Imperial (221 BC – 1800s)
    Colonial (1800s–1930s)
    Occupied (1940s)
    Modern Hong Kong (1950s–1997)
        1950s | 60s | 70s | 80s | 90s
        Handover to PRC rule
    At present

   Aviation history
   Bus history
   Technical standards

History of China
History of the UK

Other Hong Kong topics
CultureEconomy
EducationGeographyPolitics
Hong Kong Portal

However, in July 1839 rioting British sailors destroyed a temple near Kowloon and murdered a man named Lin Weixi who tried to stop them. Because China did not have a jury trial system or evidentiary process (the magistrate was the prosecutor, judge, jury and would-be executioner), the British government and community in China wanted "extraterritoriality", which meant that British subjects would only be tried by British judges. When the Qing authorities demanded the men be handed over for trial, the British refused. Six sailors were tried by the British authorities in Canton (Guangzhou), but they were immediately released after they reached England. Charles Elliott's authority is in dispute; the British government later claimed that without authority from the Qing government he had no legal right to try anyone, although according to the British Act of Parliament that gave him authority over British merchants and sailors, 'he was expressly appointed to preside over ' Court of Justice with Criminal an Admiralty Jurisdiction for the trial of offenses committed by His Majesty's subjects in the said Dominions or on the high sea within a hundred miles of the coast of China'".[6]

The Qing authorities also insisted that British merchants not be allowed to trade unless they signed a bond, under penalty of death, promising not to smuggle opium, agreeing to follow Chinese laws, and acknowledging Qing legal jurisdiction. Refusing to hand over any suspects or agree to the bonds, Charles Elliot ordered the British community to withdraw from Canton and prohibited trade with the Chinese. Some merchants who didn't deal in opium were willing to sign the bond, thereby weakening the British trading position.

[edit] War

Preparing for war, the British seized Hong Kong (then a minor outpost) as a base on 23 August 1839. In late October the Thomas Coutts arrived in China and sailed to Guangdong. This ship was owned by Quakers who refused to deal in opium, and its captain, Smith, believed Elliot had exceeded his legal authority by banning trade. The captain negotiated with the governor of Canton and hoped that all British ships could unload their goods at Chuenpeh, an island near Humen. In order to prevent other British ships from following the Thomas Coutts, Elliot ordered a blockade of the Pearl River (China). Fighting began on 3 November 1839, when a second British ship, the Royal Saxon, attempted to sail to Guangdong. Then the Volage and Hyacinth fired a warning shot at the Royal Saxon. The official Qing navy's report claimed that the navy attempted to protect the British merchant vessel and also reported a great victory for that day. Elliot reports that they were protecting their 29 ships in Chuenpeh between the Qing batteries. Elliot knew that Chinese would reject any contacts with British and there would be an attack with fire boats. Elliot ordered all ships to leave Chuenpeh and head for Tung Lo Wan, 20 miles (30 km) from Macau, but the merchants liked to harbour in Hong Kong. In reality, they were out-classed by the Royal Naval vessels and many Chinese ships were sunk. In 1840 Elliot asked the Portuguese governor in Macau to let British ships load and unload their goods at Macau and they would pay rents and any duties. The governor refused for fear that the Qing Government would discontinue to supply food and other necessities to Macau. On 14 January 1840, the Qing Emperor asked all foreigners in China to stop helping British in China.

Lord Palmerston, the English Prime Minister initiated the Opium War in order to obtain full compensation for the destroyed opium. China lost the war and was forced to open its five ports to foreign merchants and to permit a territorial concession of Hong Kong.

This unjust war was denounced in Parliament as unjust and iniquitous by young William Ewart Gladstone, who accused lord Palmerston to protect an infamous contraband traffic. The great outrage was expressed by the public opinion and the press, in America and England, for these 19th century drug dealers, protected by the English colonial interests, and its government.

In retaliation, the British Government and British East India Company had reached a conclusion that they would attack Guangdong. The military cost would be paid by the British Government. In June 1840, an expeditionary force of 15 barracks ships, 4 steam-powered gunboats and 25 smaller boats with 4000 marines reached Guangdong from Singapore. The marines were headed by James Bremer. Bremer demanded the Qing Government compensate the British for losses suffered from interrupted trade. Following the orders of Lord Palmerston, then Foreign secretary of Britain, the British expedition blockaded the Mouth of Pearl River and moved north to take Chusan.

The next year, 1841, the British captured the Bogue forts which guarded the mouth of the Pearl River—the waterway between Hong Kong and Canton. By January 1841, British forces commanded the high ground around Canton and defeated the Chinese at Ningbo and at the military post of Chinghai.

By the middle of 1842, the British had defeated the Chinese at the mouth of their other great riverine trade route, the Yangtze, and were occupying Shanghai. The Qing government proved incapable of dealing with Western Powers on an equal basis, either politically or militarily. The war finally ended in August 1842, with the signing of China's first Unequal Treaty, the Treaty of Nanjing. Gen. Sir Anthony Blaxland Stransham led the Royal Marines during the Opium War as a young officer, and as the 'Grand Old Man of the Army', was awarded two knighthoods by Queen Victoria.[citation needed]

[edit] Legacies of the War

The ease with which the British forces had defeated the Chinese armies seriously affected the Qing Dynasty's prestige. This almost certainly contributed to the Taiping Rebellion (1850–1864)[citation needed]. The success of the First Opium War allowed the British to resume the drug trafficking within China. It also paved the way for the opening of the lucrative Chinese market and Chinese society to missionary endeavours.

Among the most notable figures in the events leading up to military action in the Opium War was the man the Manchu Daoguang emperor assigned to suppress the opium trade[7]; Lin Zexu, known for his superlative service under the Qing Dynasty as "Lin the Clear Sky"[8]. Although he had some initial success, with the arrest of 1,700 opium dealers and the destruction of 2.6 million pounds of opium, he was made a scapegoat for the actions leading to British retaliation, and was blamed for ultimately failing to stem the tide of opium import and use in China[9]. Nevertheless, Lin Zexu is popularly viewed as a hero of 19th century China, and his likeness has been immortalized at various locations around the world[10]/[11]/[12]/[13].

 

 

Opium Wars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Combat at Guangzhou (Canton) during the Second Opium War

The Opium Wars (simplified Chinese: 鸦片战争; traditional Chinese: 鴉片戰爭; pinyin: Yāpiàn Zhànzhēng), also known as the Anglo-Chinese Wars, lasted from 1839 to 1842 and 1856 to 1860,[1] the climax of a trade dispute between China under the Qing Dynasty and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. British smuggling of opium from British India into China in defiance of China's drug laws erupted into open warfare between Britain and China.

China's defeat in both wars left its government having to tolerate the opium trade. Britain forced the Chinese government into signing the Treaty of Nanjing and the Treaty of Tianjin, also known as the Unequal Treaties, which included provisions for the opening of additional ports to foreign trade, for fixed tariffs; for the recognition of both countries as equal in correspondence; and for the annexation of Hong Kong by Britain. The British also gained extraterritorial rights. Several countries followed Britain and sought similar agreements with China. Many Chinese found these agreements humiliating and these sentiments are considered to have contributed to the Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864), the Boxer Rebellion (1899-1901), and the downfall of Qing in 1912.[citation needed] The Opium Wars forcefully and suddenly opened China to the world.[2]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Background

Direct maritime trade between Europe and China started in the 16th century, after the Portuguese conquered the Indian settlement of Goa in the mid 16th century, and in 1557 settled Macau in southern China. After Spanish acquisition of the Philippines, exchange of goods between China and the West accelerated dramatically. The Manila Galleon brought in far more silver direct from South American mines to China than the overland Silk Road, or even Portuguese trade routes in the Indian and Pacific oceans could. Faced with a flood of trade, the Qing government attempted to limit contact with the outside world, only authorizing trade through the port of Canton (now Guangzhou). Severe red-tape and licensed monopolies were set up to restrict the flow of trade, resulting in high retail prices for imported goods and limited demand[citation needed]. Spain began to sell opium, along with New World products such as tobacco and corn, to the Chinese in order to prevent a trade deficit[clarification needed].

A combination of the Qing trade restrictions and imperial monopolies, low Chinese demand for European goods, and high European demand for Chinese goods, including tea, silk, and porcelain, forced European merchants to purchase these goods with silver, the only commodity the Chinese would accept. From the mid-17th century around 28 million kilograms of silver was imported to China.[3] This was not a viable long term trading dynamic. Britain had been using the gold standard from the mid 18th Century and therefore had to purchase silver from other European countries[citation needed].

In the 18th century, despite ardent protest from the Qing government, Britain began importing opium from India. Because of its strong mass appeal and addictive nature, opium was an effective solution to the trade problem. An instant consumer market for the drug was secured, and the flow of silver into China that had threatened to cripple British and other European economies was reversed[citation needed]. Recognizing the growing number of addicts, the Yongzheng Emperor prohibited the sale and smoking of opium in 1729, and only allowed a small amount of opium imports for medicinal purposes.[4]

[edit] Growth of the opium trade

Opium destruction

Following the Battle of Plassey in 1757, in which Britain annexed Bengal to its empire, the British East India Company pursued a monopoly on production and export of Indian opium. Monopoly began in earnest in 1773, as the British Governor-General of Bengal abolished the opium syndicate at Patna. For the next fifty years opium trade would be the key to the East India Company's hold on the subcontinent.

Considering that importation of opium into China had been virtually banned by Chinese law, the East India Company established an elaborate trading scheme partially relying on legal markets, and partially leveraging illicit ones. British merchants carrying no opium would buy tea in Canton on credit, and would balance their debts by selling opium at auction in Calcutta. From there, the opium would reach the Chinese coast hidden aboard British ships then smuggled into China by native merchants. In 1797 the company further tightened its grip on the opium trade by enforcing direct trade between opium farmers and the British, and ending the role of Bengali purchasing agents.

British exports of opium to China grew from an estimated fifteen tons in 1730 to 75 tons in 1773. The product was shipped in over two thousand chests, each containing 140 pounds (64 kg) of opium[citation needed].

Meanwhile, negotiations with the Qianlong Emperor to ease the trading ban carried on, coming to a head in under Earl George Macartney in 1793. Such discussions were unsuccessful[citation needed].

In 1799 the Chinese Empire reinstated their ban on opium imports. The Empire issued the following decree in 1810:

Opium has a harm. Opium is a poison, undermining our good customs and morality. Its use is prohibited by law. Now the commoner, Yang, dares to bring it into the Forbidden City. Indeed, he flouts the law!
However, recently the purchases, eaters, and consumers of opium have become numerous. Deceitful merchants buy and sell it to gain profit. The customs house at the Ch'ung-wen Gate was originally set up to supervise the collection of imports (it had no responsibility with regard to opium smuggling). If we confine our search for opium to the seaports, we fear the search will not be sufficiently thorough. We should also order the general commandant of the police and police- censors at the five gates to prohibit opium and to search for it at all gates. If they capture any violators, they should immediately punish them and should destroy the opium at once. As to Kwangtung and Fukien, the provinces from which opium comes, we order their viceroys, governors, and superintendents of the maritime customs to conduct a thorough search for opium, and cut off its supply. They should in no ways consider this order a dead letter and allow opium to be smuggled out![5]

The decree had little effect. The Qing government, seated in Beijing in the north of China, was unable to halt opium smuggling in the southern provinces. A porous Chinese border and rampant local demand only encouraged the all-too eager East India Company, which had its monopoly on opium trade recognized by the British government, which itself wanted silver (see gold standard). By the 1820s China was importing 900 tons of Bengali opium annually.

[edit] Napier Affair to the First Opium War (1839–1842)

Lin Zexu's "memorial" (摺奏) written directly to Queen Victoria
Main article: First Opium War

In 1834 to accommodate the revocation of the East India Company's monopoly, the British sent Lord William John Napier to Macau. He tried to circumvent the restrictive Canton Trade laws which forbade direct contact with Chinese officials by attempting to send a letter directly to the Viceroy of Canton but the Viceroy never accepted the letter and closed trade starting on 2 September of that year. Lord Napier had to return to Macau (where he died a few days later) and, unable to force the matter, the British agreed to resume trade under the old restrictions.

Within the Chinese mandarinate there was an ongoing debate over legalizing the opium trade itself. However, this idea was repeatedly rejected and instead, in 1838 the government sentenced native drug traffickers to death. Around this time, the British were selling roughly 1,400 tons per year to China. In March 1839 the Emperor appointed a new strict Confucianist commissioner, Lin Zexu, to control the opium trade at the port of Canton.[6] His first course of action was to enforce the imperial demand that there be a permanent halt to drug shipments into China. When the British refused to end the trade, Lin imposed a trade embargo on the British. On 27 March 1839 Charles Elliot, British Superintendent of Trade, demanded that all British subjects turn over their opium to him, to be confiscated by Commissioner Lin Zexu, amounting to nearly a year's supply of the drug. In a departure from his brief, he promised that the crown would compensate them for the lost opium. While this amounted to a tacit acknowledgment that the British government did not disapprove of the trade, it also forced a huge liability on the exchequer. Unable to allocate funds for an illegal drug but pressed for compensation by the merchants, this liability is cited as one reason for the decision to force a war.[7] After the opium was surrendered, trade was restarted on the strict condition that no more drugs would be smuggled into China. Lin demanded that British merchants had to sign a bond promising not to deal in opium under penalty of death.[8] The British officially opposed signing of the bond, but some British merchants that did not deal in opium were willing to sign. Lin had the opium disposed of by dissolving it in water, salt, and lime, and dumping it into the ocean.

In 1839 Lin took the extraordinary step of presenting a letter directly to Queen Victoria questioning the moral reasoning of the British government. Citing what he understood to be a strict prohibition of the trade within Great Britain, Lin questioned how it could then profit from the drug in China. He wrote: "Your Majesty has not before been thus officially notified, and you may plead ignorance of the severity of our laws, but I now give my assurance that we mean to cut this harmful drug forever."[9] Opium was not illegal in England at the time, however, where comparably smaller quantities were imported to be smoked.

It is believed that the queen never received Lin's letter. The British government and merchants offered no response to Lin, accusing him instead of destroying their property. Lin had had a large quantity of opium destroyed; it had been confiscated mainly from British traders, put into a specially-dug canal, treated with lye and washed out to sea. When the British learned of what was taking place in Canton, as communications between these two parts of the world took months at this time, they sent a large British Indian army, which arrived in June 1840.[10]

British military superiority was clearly evident during the armed conflict. British warships, constructed using such innovations as steam power combined with sail and the use of iron in shipbuilding, wreaked havoc on coastal towns; such ships (like the Nemesis) were not only virtually indestructible but also highly mobile and able to support a gun platform with very heavy guns. In addition, the British troops were armed with modern muskets and cannons, unlike the Qing forces. After the British took Canton, they sailed up the Yangtze and took the tax barges, a devastating blow to the Empire as it slashed the revenue of the imperial court in Beijing to just a small fraction of what it had been.

In 1842 the Qing authorities sued for peace, which concluded with the Treaty of Nanjing negotiated in August of that year and ratified in 1843. In the treaty, China was forced to pay an indemnity to Britain, open four ports to Britain, and cede Hong Kong to Queen Victoria. In the supplementary Treaty of the Bogue, the Qing empire also recognized Britain as an equal to China and gave British subjects extraterritorial privileges in treaty ports. In 1844, the United States and France concluded similar treaties with China, the Treaty of Wanghia and Treaty of Whampoa respectively.

[edit] Second Opium War (1856-1860)

opium production chart

By the late 19th and early 20th century, opium was one of the largest commercial enterprises in the world. However, in the early 20th century many countries began to pass laws making opium illegal, partly because of fear of western addiction, which marked a transition of the enterprise from a legal to an illicit one. Despite the massive profits (and built-in demand from addicts) the regulatory changes seem to have had a significant effect. After the turn of the century, opium production dropped radically around the world.

Main article: Second Opium War

The Second Opium War, or Arrow War, broke out following an incident in October 1856 during which Chinese officials boarded a vessel by the name of Arrow outside the port of Whampoa[citation needed]. The eponymous ship was owned by a Chinese privateer who had registered the vessel with British authorities in Hong Kong (according to some to facilitate privateering[citation needed]); he had received a one-year permit from the Hong Kong authorities but it was expired when inspected by the official who boarded the vessel. The crew were accused of piracy and smuggling and were arrested. In response, the British consulate in Guangzhou insisted the vessel was under British jurisdiction and accused Chinese officials of tearing down and violating the British flag during the inspection[citation needed]. The war started when British forces attacked Guangzhou in 1856.

French forces joined the British intervention after a French missionary Auguste Chapdelaine was killed by a local Mandarin in China[citation needed]. Other nations became involved diplomatically, although they didn't provide military personnel.

The Treaty of Tianjin was created in July 1858 but was not ratified by China until two years later; this would prove to be a very important document in China's early modern history as it was one of the primary Unequal Treaties.

Hostilities broke out once more in 1859 after China refused to establish a British embassy in Beijing as had been promised by the Treaty of Tianjin. Fighting erupted both in Hong Kong as well as Beijing, where the British set out to destroy the Summer Palace and the Old Summer Palace. China ratified the Treaty of Tianjin at the Convention of Peking in 1860, ending the war. The treaty provided for the creation of ten new port cities, permission for foreigners (including Protestant and Catholic missionaries) to travel throughout the country, and indemnities of three million ounces of silver to Great Britain and two million to France.

[edit] Hero in the war against opium

Main article: Lin Zexu

Lin Zexu, Governor-General of Hunan and Hubei, recognizing the consequences of opium abuse, embarked on an anti-opium campaign in which 1,700 opium dealers were arrested and 2.6 million pounds of opium were confiscated and destroyed.

Although Lin Zexu was popularly considered a man of superlative conduct and high morals,[11]

his war against the illicit drug ultimately failed. He was made a scapegoat by the emperor,

under heavy pressure from the Western powers, for having provoked British military retaliation in the First Opium War. [12]

Lin Zexu is now viewed as a hero of 19th century China who stood against European imperialism. His likeness has been immortalized at various locations around the world.[13][14][15][16]

 

East India Company

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  (Redirected from British East India Company)
Jump to: navigation, search
East India Company
FateDissolved and activities absorbed by Crown
Founded1600
Defunct1858 (formally dissolved in 1873)
HeadquartersLondon

The East India Company (also the English East India Company,[1] and sometimes the British East India Company,[2]) was an early English joint-stock company[3] that was formed initially for pursuing trade with the East Indies, but that ended up trading with India and China. The oldest among several similarly formed European East India Companies, the Company was granted an English Royal Charter, under the name Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, by Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600.[4] After a rival English company challenged its monopoly in the late 17th century, the two companies were merged in 1708 to form the United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies, commonly styled the Honourable East India Company,[5] and abbreviated, HEIC;[6] the Company was colloquially referred to as John Company,[7] and in India as Company Bahadur ("bahādur": Hindustani, lit. "brave").[8]

East India Company traded mainly in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre, tea, and opium. However, it also came to rule large swathes of India, exercising military power and assuming administrative functions, to the exclusion, gradually, of its commercial pursuits. Company rule in India lasted until 1858, when, following the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, and under the Government of India Act 1858, the British Crown assumed direct administration of India in the new British Raj. The Company itself was finally dissolved on 1 January 1874, as a result of the East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act.


Colonial India
Portuguese India1510–1961
Dutch India1605–1825
Danish India1696–1869
French India1759–1954
British Empire in India
East India Company1612–1757
Company rule in India1757–1857
British Raj1858–1947
British rule in Burma1826–1948
British India1612–1947
Princely States1765–1947
Partition of India1947
This box: view  talk  edit

Contents

[hide]

[edit] History

[edit] The foundation years

Soon after the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588, a group of merchants of London presented a petition to Queen Elizabeth I for permission to sail to the Indian Ocean.[9] The permission was granted and in 1591 three ships sailed from England, around the Cape of Good Hope, to the Arabian Sea; one of them, the Edward Bonaventure, then sailed around Cape Comorin and on to the Malay Peninsula, and subsequently returned to England in 1594.[9] In 1596, three more ships sailed out east, however, these were all lost at sea.[9] Two years later, on September 24, 1599, another group of merchants of London, having raised £30,133 in capital, met to form a corporation. Although their first attempt was unsuccessful, they nonetheless set about seeking the Queen's unofficial approval, purchased ships for their venture, increased their capital to £68,373, and convened again a year later.[9] This time they succeeded, and on December 31, 1600, the last day of the sixteenth century, the Queen granted a Royal Charter to "George, Earl of Cumberland, and 215 Knights, Aldermen, and Burgesses" under the name, Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading with the East Indies.[10] The charter awarded the newly formed company, for a period of fifteen years, a monopoly of trade with all countries to the east of the Cape of Good Hope and to the west of the Straits of Magellan.[10] Sir James Lancaster commanded the first East India Company voyage in 1601.[11]

Initially, the Company struggled in the spice trade due to the competition from the already well established Dutch. However the Company did open a factory in Bantam on the first voyage and imports of pepper from Java were an important part of the Company's trade for twenty years. The factory in Bantam was finally closed in 1683. During this time ships belonging to the company arrived in India, docking at Surat, which was established as a trade transit point in 1608. In the next two years, it managed to build its first factory (as the trading posts were known) in the town of Machilipatnam on the Coromandel Coast of the Bay of Bengal. The high profits reported by the Company after landing in India (presumably owing to a reduction in overhead costs affected by the transit points), initially prompted King James I to grant subsidiary licenses to other trading companies in England. But, in 1609, he renewed the charter given to the Company for an indefinite period, including a clause which specified that the charter would cease to be in force if the trade turned unprofitable for three consecutive years.

The Company was led by one Governor and 24 directors who made up the Court of Directors. They were appointed by, and reported to, the Court of Proprietors. The Court of Directors had ten committees reporting to it.

[edit] Foothold in India

English traders frequently engaged in hostilities with their Dutch and Portuguese counterparts in the Indian Ocean. The Company achieved a major victory over the Portuguese in the Battle of Swally in 1612. Perhaps realizing the cost of waging trade wars in remote seas, the Company decided to explore the feasibility for gaining a territorial foothold in mainland India, with official sanction of both countries, and requested the Crown to launch a diplomatic mission. In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was instructed by James I to visit the Mughal Emperor Nuruddin Salim Jahangir, who ruled from 1605 - 1627, to arrange for a commercial treaty which would give the Company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in Surat and other areas. In return, the Company offered to provide the Emperor with goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was highly successful as Jahangir sent a letter to James through Sir Thomas Roe:

"Upon which assurance of your royal love I have given my general command to all the kingdoms and ports of my dominions to receive all the merchants of the English nation as the subjects of my friend; that in what place soever they choose to live, they may have free liberty without any restraint; and at what port soever they shall arrive, that neither Portugal nor any other shall dare to molest their quiet; and in what city soever they shall have residence, I have commanded all my governors and captains to give them freedom answerable to their own desires; to sell, buy, and to transport into their country at their pleasure.
For confirmation of our love and friendship, I desire your Majesty to command your merchants to bring in their ships of all sorts of rarities and rich goods fit for my palace; and that you be pleased to send me your royal letters by every opportunity, that I may rejoice in your health and prosperous affairs; that our friendship may be interchanged and eternal." [12]

[edit] Expansion

The Company, benefiting from the imperial patronage, soon expanded its commercial trading operations, eclipsing the Portuguese Estado da India, which had established bases in Goa, Chittagong and Bombay (which was later ceded to England as part of the dowry of Catherine de Braganza). The Company created trading posts in Surat (where a factory was built in 1612), Madras (1639), Bombay (1668) and Calcutta (1690). By 1647, the Company had 23 factories, each under the command of a factor or master merchant and governor if so chosen, and 90 employees in India. The major factories became the walled forts of Fort William in Bengal, Fort St George in Madras and the Bombay Castle.

In 1634, the Mughal emperor extended his hospitality to the English traders to the region of Bengal (and in 1717 completely waived customs duties for the trade). The company's mainstay businesses were by now in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre and tea. All the while, it was making inroads into the Dutch monopoly of the spice trade in the Malaccan straits, which the Dutch had acquired by ousting the Portuguese in 1640-41. In 1711, the Company established a trading post in Canton (Guangzhou), China, to trade tea for silver. In 1657, Oliver Cromwell renewed the charter of 1609, and brought about minor changes in the holding of the Company. The status of the Company was further enhanced by the restoration of monarchy in England. By a series of five acts around 1670, King Charles II provisioned it with the rights to autonomous territorial acquisitions, to mint money, to command fortresses and troops and form alliances, to make war and peace, and to exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the acquired areas.

[edit] The road to a complete monopoly

[edit] Trade monopoly

The prosperity that the employees of the company enjoyed allowed them to return to their country and establish sprawling estates and businesses, and to obtain political power. Consequently, the Company developed for itself a lobby in the English parliament. However, under pressure from ambitious tradesmen and former associates of the Company (pejoratively termed Interlopers by the Company), who wanted to establish private trading firms in India, a deregulating act was passed in 1694. This allowed any English firm to trade with India, unless specifically prohibited by act of parliament, thereby annulling the charter that was in force for almost 100 years. By an act that was passed in 1698, a new "parallel" East India Company (officially titled the English Company Trading to the East Indies) was floated under a state-backed indemnity of £2 million. However, the powerful stockholders of the old company quickly subscribed a sum of £315,000 in the new concern, and dominated the new body. The two companies wrestled with each other for some time, both in England and in India, for a dominant share of the trade. However, it quickly became evident that, in practice, the original Company faced scarcely any measurable competition. Both companies finally merged in 1708, by a tripartite indenture involving them both as well as the state. Under this arrangement, the merged company lent to the Treasury a sum of £3,200,000, in return for exclusive privileges for the next three years, after which the situation was to be reviewed. The amalgamated company became the United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies.

In the following decades there was a constant see-saw battle between the Company lobby and the Parliament. The Company sought a permanent establishment, while the Parliament would not willingly allow it greater autonomy, and so relinquish the opportunity to exploit the Company's profits. In 1712, another act renewed the status of the Company, though the debts were repaid. By 1720, 15% of British imports were from India, almost all passing through the Company, which reasserted the influence of the Company lobby. The license was prolonged until 1766 by yet another act in 1730.

At this time, Britain and France became bitter rivals. Frequent skirmishes between them took place for control of colonial possessions. In 1742, fearing the monetary consequences of a war, the British government agreed to extend the deadline for the licensed exclusive trade by the Company in India until 1783, in return for a further loan of £1 million. The skirmishes did escalate to the feared war. Between 1756 and 1763, the Seven Years' War diverted the state's attention towards consolidation and defence of its territorial possessions in Europe and its colonies in North America. The war also took place on Indian soil, between the Company troops and the French forces. In 1757, the Law Officers of the Crown delivered the Pratt-Yorke opinion distinguishing overseas territories acquired by conquest from those acquired by private treaty. The opinion asserted that, while the Crown of Great Britain enjoyed sovereignty over both, only the property of the former was vested in the Crown.[13]

With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, Britain surged ahead of its European rivals. Demand for Indian commodities was boosted by the need to sustain the troops and the economy during the war, and by the increased availability of raw materials and efficient methods of production. As home to the revolution, Britain experienced higher standards of living. Its spiralling cycle of prosperity, demand and production had a profound influence on overseas trade. The Company became the single largest player in the British global market. It reserved for itself an unassailable position in the decision-making process of the Government.

William Pyne notes in his book The Microcosm of London (1808) that

"On the 1 March 1801, the debts of the East India Company to £5,393,989 their effects to £15,404,736 and their sales increased since February 1793, from £4,988,300 to £7,602,041."

[edit] Saltpetre trade

Sir John Banks, a businessman from Kent who negotiated an agreement between the King and the Company, began his career in a syndicate arranging contracts for victualling the navy, an interest he kept up for most of his life. He knew Pepys and John Evelyn and founded a substantial fortune from the Levant and Indian trades. He also became a Director and later, as Governor of the East Indian Company in 1672, he was able to arrange a contract which included a loan of £20,000 and £30,000 worth of saltpetre for the King 'at the price it shall sell by the candle'[citation needed] - that is by auction - where an inch of candle burned and as long as it was alight bidding could continue. The agreement also included with the price 'an allowance of interest which is to be expressed in tallies.'[citation needed] This was something of a breakthrough in royal prerogative because previous requests for the King to buy at the Company's auctions had been turned down as 'not honourable or decent.'[citation needed] Outstanding debts were also agreed and the Company permitted to export 250 tons of saltpetre. Again in 1673, Banks successfully negotiated another contract for 700 tons of saltpetre at £37,000 between the King and the Company. So urgent was the need to supply the armed forces in the United Kingdom, America and elsewhere that the authorities sometimes turned a blind eye on the untaxed sales. One governor of the Company was even reported as saying in 1864 that he would rather have the saltpetre made than the tax on salt. [14]

[edit] The basis for the monopoly

[edit] Colonial monopoly

Robert Clive, 1st Baron Clive, became the first British Governor of Bengal.

The Seven Years' War (1756 – 1763) resulted in the defeat of the French forces and limited French imperial ambitions, also stunting the influence of the industrial revolution in French territories. Robert Clive, the Governor General, led the Company to an astounding victory against Joseph François Dupleix, the commander of the French forces in India, and recaptured Fort St George from the French. The Company took this respite to seize Manila[15] in 1762. By the Treaty of Paris (1763), the French were allowed to maintain their trade posts only in small enclaves in Pondicherry, Mahe, Karikal, Yanam, and Chandernagar without any military presence. Although these small outposts remained French possessions for the next two hundred years, French ambitions on Indian territories were effectively laid to rest, thus eliminating a major source of economic competition for the Company. In contrast, the Company, fresh from a colossal victory, and with the backing of a disciplined and experienced army, was able to assert its interests in the Carnatic from its base at Madras and in Bengal from Calcutta, without facing any further obstacles from other colonial powers.

[edit] Military expansion

Main article: Company rule in India

The Company continued to experience resistance from local rulers during its expansion. Robert Clive led company forces against Siraj Ud Daulah, the last independent Nawab of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa to victory at the Battle of Plassey in 1757, resulting in the conquest of Bengal. This victory estranged the British and the Mughals, since Siraj Ud Daulah was a Mughal feudatory ally. But the Mughal empire was already on the wane after the demise of Aurangzeb, and was breaking up into pieces and enclaves. After the Battle of Buxar, Shah Alam II, the ruling emperor, gave up the administrative rights over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. Clive thus became the first British Governor of Bengal.

Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan, the legendary rulers of Mysore (in Carnatic), gave a tough time to the British forces. Having sided with the French during the war, the rulers of Mysore continued their struggle against the Company with the four Anglo-Mysore Wars. Mysore finally fell to the Company forces in 1799, with the slaying of Tipu Sultan.

With the gradual weakening of the Maratha empire in the aftermath of the three Anglo-Maratha wars, the British also secured Bombay and the surrounding areas. It was during these campaigns, both against Mysore and the Marathas, that Arthur Wellesley, later Duke of Wellington, first showed the abilities which would lead to victory in the Peninsular War and at the Battle of Waterloo. A particularly notable engagement involving forces under his command was the Battle of Assaye. Thus, the British had secured the entire region of Southern India (with the exception of small enclaves of French and local rulers), Western India and Eastern India.

The last vestiges of local administration were restricted to the northern regions of Delhi, Oudh, Rajputana, and Punjab, where the Company's presence was ever increasing amidst the infighting and dubious offers of protection against each other. Coercive action, threats and diplomacy aided the Company in preventing the local rulers from putting up a united struggle against it. The hundred years from the Battle of Plassey in 1757 to the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 were a period of consolidation for the Company, which began to function more as a nation and less as a trading concern.

[edit] Opium trade

Main article: Opium Wars

In the eighteenth century, Britain had a huge trade deficit with Qing Dynasty China and so in 1773, the Company created a British monopoly on opium buying in Bengal. As opium trade was illegal in China, Company ships could not carry opium to China. So the opium produced in Bengal was sold in Calcutta on condition that it be sent to China.[16]

Despite the Chinese ban on opium imports, reaffirmed in 1799, it was smuggled into China from Bengal by traffickers and agency houses (such as Jardine, Matheson and Company and Company, Ltd.) averaging 900 tons a year. The proceeds from drug-runners at Lintin Island were paid into the Company’s factory at Canton and by 1825, most of the money needed to buy tea in China was raised by the illegal opium trade. In 1838, with opium smuggling approaching 1400 tons a year, the Chinese imposed a death penalty on opium smuggling and sent a new governor, Lin Zexu to curb smuggling. This finally resulted in the First Opium War, eventually leading to the British seizure of Hong Kong and the opening of the Chinese market to British drug traffickers.

[edit] Regulation of the company's affairs

Monopolistic activity by the company triggered the Boston Tea Party.

[edit] Financial troubles

Though the Company was becoming increasingly bold and ambitious in putting down resisting states, it was getting clearer day by day that the Company was incapable of governing the vast expanse of the captured territories. The Bengal famine, in which one-third of the local population died, set the alarm bells ringing back home. Military and administrative costs mounted beyond control in British administered regions in Bengal due to the ensuing drop in labour productivity. At the same time, there was commercial stagnation and trade depression throughout Europe following the lull in the post-Industrial Revolution period. The desperate directors of the company attempted to avert bankruptcy by appealing to Parliament for financial help. This led to the passing of the Tea Act in 1773, which gave the Company greater autonomy in running its trade in America. When the American colonists were told of the act, they tried top boycott it, claiming that, although the price had gone down on the tea when enforcing the act, it was a tax all the same, and the king should not have the right to just have a tax for no apparent reason. Its monopolistic activities triggered the Boston Tea Party in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, one of the major events leading up to the American Revolution.

[edit] Regulating Acts

[edit] East India Company Act 1773

By this Act (13 Geo. III, c. 63), the Parliament of Great Britain imposed a series of administrative and economic reforms and by doing so clearly established its sovereignty and ultimate control over the Company. The Act recognized the Company's political functions and clearly established that the "acquisition of sovereignty by the subjects of the Crown is on behalf of the Crown and not in its own right."

Despite stiff resistance from the East India lobby in parliament, and from the Company's shareholders, the Act was passed. It introduced substantial governmental control, and allowed the land to be formally under the control of the Crown, but leased to the Company at £40,000 for two years. Under this provision, the governor of Bengal Warren Hastings was promoted to the rank of Governor General, having administrative powers over all of British India. It provided that his nomination, though made by a court of directors, should in future be subject to the approval of a Council of Four appointed by the Crown - namely Lt. General John Clavering, George Monson, Richard Barwell and Philip Francis. He was entrusted with the power of peace and war. British judicial personnel would also be sent to India to administer the British legal system. The Governor General and the council would have complete legislative powers. Thus, Warren Hastings became the first Governor-General of India. The company was allowed to maintain its virtual monopoly over trade, in exchange for the biennial sum and an obligation to export a minimum quantity of goods yearly to Britain. The costs of administration were also to be met by the company. These provisions, initially welcomed by the Company, backfired. The Company had an annual burden on its back, and its finances continued steadily to decline.[17]

[edit] East India Company Act (Pitt's India Act) 1784

The India Act of 1784 (24 Geo. III, s. 2, c. 25) had two key aspects:

  • Relationship to the British government: the bill differentiated the East India Company's political functions from its commercial activities. In political matters the East India Company was subordinated to the British government directly. To accomplish this, the Act created a Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India, usually referred to as the Board of Control. The members of the Board were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a Secretary of State, and four Privy Councillors, nominated by the King. The act specified that the Secretary of State "shall preside at, and be President of the said Board".
  • Internal Administration of British India: the bill laid the foundation for the centralized and bureaucratic British administration of India which would reach its peak at the beginning of the twentieth century during the governor-generalship of George Nathaniel Curzon, 1st Baron Curzon.
The expanded East India House, Leadenhall Street, London, as rebuilt 1799-1800, Richard Jupp, architect (as seen c. 1817; demolished in 1929)

Pitt's Act was deemed a failure because it quickly became apparent that the boundaries between government control and the company's powers were nebulous and highly subjective. The government also felt obliged to respond to humanitarian calls for better treatment of local peoples in British-occupied territories. Edmund Burke, a former East India Company shareholder and diplomat, was moved to address the situation and introduced a new Regulating Bill in 1783. The bill was defeated, however, due to intense lobbying by company loyalists and accusations of nepotism in the bill's recommendations for the appointment of councillors.

[edit] Act of 1786

This Act (26 Geo. III c. 16) enacted the demand of Lord Cornwallis, that the powers of the Governor-General be enlarged to empower him, in special cases, to override the majority of his Council and act on his own special responsibility. The Act also enabled the offices of the Governor-General and the Commander-in-Chief to be jointly held by the same official.

This Act clearly demarcated borders between the Crown and the Company. After this point, the Company functioned as a regularized subsidiary of the Crown, with greater accountability for its actions and reached a stable stage of expansion and consolidation. Having temporarily achieved a state of truce with the Crown, the Company continued to expand its influence to nearby territories through threats and coercive actions. By the middle of the 19th century, the Company's rule extended across most of India, Burma, Malaya, Singapore and Hong Kong, and a fifth of the world's population was under its trading influence.

[edit] Charter Act 1813

The aggressive policies of Lord Wellesley and the Marquis of Hastings led to the Company gaining control of all India, except for the Punjab, Sind and Nepal. The Indian Princes had become vassals of the Company. But the expense of wars leading to the total control of India strained the Company’s finances to the breaking point. The Company was forced to petition Parliament for assistance. This was the background to the Charter Act of 1813 (53 Geo. III c. 155) which, among other things:

  • asserted the sovereignty of the British Crown over the Indian territories held by the Company;
  • renewed the Charter of Company for a further twenty years but,
    • deprived the Company of its Indian trade monopoly except for trade in tea and the trade with China;
    • required the Company to maintain separate and distinct its commercial and territorial accounts; and,
  • opened India to missionaries.

[edit] Charter Act 1833

The Industrial Revolution in Britain, and the consequent search for markets, and the rise of laissez-faire economic ideology form the background to this act. The Act:

  • removed the Company's remaining trade monopolies and divested it of all its commercial functions;
  • renewed for another twenty years the Company’s political and administrative authority;
  • invested the Board of Control with full power and authority over the Company. As stated by Kapur Professor Sri Ram Sharma, thus, summed up the point: "The President of the Board of Control now became Minister for Indian Affairs";
  • carried further the ongoing process of administrative centralization through investing the Governor-General in Council with, full power and authority to superintend and, control the Presidency Governments in all civil and military matters;
  • initiated a machinery for the codification of laws;
  • provided that no Indian subject of the Company would be debarred from holding any office under the Company by reason of his religion, place of birth, descent or colour. However, this remained a dead letter well into the 20th century;
  • vested the Island of St Helena in the Crown.

Meanwhile, British influence continued to expand; in 1845, the Danish colony of Tranquebar was sold to Great Britain. The Company had at various stages extended its influence to China, the Philippines, and Java. It had solved its critical lack of the cash needed to buy tea by exporting Indian-grown opium to China. China's efforts to end the trade led to the First Opium War with Britain.

[edit] Charter Act 1853

This Act provided that British India would remain under the administration of the Company in trust for the Crown until Parliament should decide otherwise.

[edit] Indian Rebellion of 1857-8

The Indian Rebellion of 1857, known to the British as the "Great Mutiny", but to Indians as the "First War of Independence", resulted in widespread devastation in India and condemnation of the Company for permitting the events to occur. One of the consequences was that the British government nationalized the Company. The Company lost all its administrative powers; its Indian possessions, including its armed forces, were taken over by the Crown pursuant to the provisions of the Government of India Act 1858.

The Company continued to manage the tea trade on behalf of the British government (and the supply of Saint Helena) until the East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act came into effect, on 1 January 1874, under the terms of which the Company was dissolved. [18]

[edit] Impact

As a trading body, the first remit of the Company was to maximise its profits and with taxation rights the profits to be obtained from Bengal came from land tax as well as trade tariffs. As lands came under company control, the land tax was typically raised by 5 times what it had been – from 10% to up to 50% of the value of the agricultural produce.[citation needed] In the first years of the rule of the British East India Company, the total land tax income was doubled and most of this revenue flowed out of the country. As the famine approached its height in April of 1770, the Company announced that the land tax for the following year was to be increased by a further 10%.[citation needed]

The company has also been criticised for forbidding the "hoarding" of rice. This prevented traders and dealers from laying in reserves that in other times would have tided the population over lean periods, as well as ordering the farmers to plant indigo instead of rice.[citation needed]

By the time of the famine, monopolies in grain trading had been established by the Company and its agents. The Company had no plan for dealing with the grain shortage, and actions were only taken insofar as they affected the mercantile and trading classes. Land revenue decreased by 14% during the affected year, but recovered rapidly (Kumkum Chatterjee). According to McLane, the first governor-general of British India, Warren Hastings, acknowledged "violent" tax collecting after 1771: revenues earned by the Company were higher in 1771 than in 1768. Globally, the profit of the Company increased from 15 million rupees in 1765 to 30 million rupees in 1777.[citation needed]

The Company also had interests along the routes to India from Great Britain. As early as 1620, the company attempted to lay claim to the Table Mountain region in South Africa; later it occupied and ruled St Helena. Piracy was a severe problem for the Company. This problem reached its peak in 1695, when pirate Henry Avery captured the Great Mughal's treasure fleet. The Company was held responsible for that raid, because according to Indian popular opinion of the time, all pirates were by definition English. Later, the Company unsuccessfully employed Captain Kidd to combat piracy in the Indian Ocean; it also cultivated the production of tea in India. Other notable events in the Company's history were that it held Napoleon captive on St Helena, and made the fortune of Elihu Yale. Its products were the basis of the Boston Tea Party in Colonial America.[citation needed]

Its shipyards provided the model for Saint Petersburg. Elements of its administration, the Honourable East India Company Civil Service (HEICS), survive in the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), the successor to the Indian Civil Service (ICS). Its corporate structure was the most successful early example of a joint stock company. The demands of Company officers on the treasury of Bengal contributed tragically to the province's incapacity in the face of a famine, which killed millions of people in 1770-1773.[citation needed]

British and other European settlements in India

The company was an aggressive party and destroyed monasteries in Tibet. It helped cause the Opium Wars as a promoter of opium smuggling. With these actions, the company diminished the popularity of England and Europeans in Tibet and China.[citation needed]

[edit] East India Club

The East India Club in London was formed in 1849 for officers of the East India Company. The Club still exists today as a private Gentlemen's Club and its club house is situated at 16 St. James's Square, London.

[edit] Flags

The East India Company flag changed over time. From the period of 1600 to 1707 (Act of Union between England and Scotland) the flag consisted of a St George's cross in the canton and a number of alternating Red and White stripes. After 1707 the canton contained the original Union Flag consisting of a combined St George's cross and a St Andrew's cross. After the Act of Union 1800, that joined Ireland into the United Kingdom, the canton of the East India Company's flag was altered accordingly to include the new Union Flag with the additional St Patrick's cross. There has been much debate and discussion regarding the number of stripes on the flag and the order of the stripes. Historical documents and paintings show many variations from 9 to 13 stripes, with some images showing the top stripe being red and others showing the top stripe being white.

At the time of the American Revolution the East India Company flag would have been identical to the Grand Union Flag. The flag probably inspired the Stars and Stripes (as argued by Sir Charles Fawcett in 1937). [19] Comparisons between the Stars and Stripes and the Company's flag from historical records present some convincing arguments. The John Company flag dates back to the 1600s whereas the United States adopted the Stars and Stripes in 1777.[20]

The stripes and gridlike appearance of the flag gave rise to several pieces of imperial slang. Most notably is the phrase 'riding the gridiron'; this referred to travelling on a ship flying the company flag to / from India.

[edit] Ships

A ship of the East India Company can also be called an East Indiaman.

[edit] East India Company Records

Unlike all other British Government records, the records from the East India Company (and its successor the India Office) are not in The National Archives at Kew, London, but are stored by the British Library in London as part of the Asia, Pacific and Africa Collection. The catalogue is searchable online in the Access to Archives catalogues.[21] Many of the East India Company records are freely available online under an agreement that FIBIS have with the British Library.

 

 

Article Information:

Title:

The British East India Company 1600-1858: A model of transition management for the modern global corporation

Author(s):

George S. Roukis

Journal:

Journal of Management Development

Year:

2004

Volume:

23

Issue:

10

Page:

938 - 948


ISSN:

0262-1711


DOI:

10.1108/02621710410566847

Publisher:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Document Access:

Existing customers:

Please login above.

You do not have rights to view the article

Purchase this document:
Price payable: GBP £13.00
plus handling charge of GBP £1.50 and VAT where applicable.
Purchase

Request this document:
Print or e-mail a document request to your librarian.
Request

Reprints & permissions:
Request

Abstract:

This paper focuses on the challenges facing global corporations which operate in a variety of environments with increasing multicultural managements and sophisticated understanding of how information technologies and organizational astuteness promote success. Compares this environment with that of the British East India Company. Suggests that corporations operating in the unpredictable environments at the start of the 21st century, in the absence of predictable government and military assistance, of necessity, will be compelled to rethink their transition strategies. Concludes that corporations will assume greater responsibility for functions – including intelligence acquisition, law enforcement, and military projection – normally provided by traditional nation-states, following the pattern of the British East India Company.

 

 Plane Crashes in Yucatan Carrying 3.2 Tons of Cocaine

 

Posted by PIMPIN TURTLE at 9/26/2007 6:02 PM and is filed under Venezuela,Drugs and Alcohol,Cops,Weird,Things you may not have heard of,Corruption and Lies

Sept. 26, 2007 -- SPECIAL REPORT -- Plane that crashed in Yucatan with 3.2 tons of cocaine was CIA rendition aircraft

WMR has learned from knowledgeable European sources that a Gulfstream II that crash landed 1.3 miles from Tikokob in Yucatan, Mexico after being chased by Mexican military helicopters for flying illegally into Mexican airspace was one of the planes chartered to the CIA for the renditioning of kidnapped prisoners. The crash landing took place on September 24. The tail number of the Gulfstream is N987SA.

Mexican soldiers found no bodies at the crash site but did discover 132 bags containing 3.3 metric tons of cocaine. The origination of the Gulfstream's flight is unknown but it was destined for Cancun when it crash landed. Police later said they had arrested one passenger who was on board the plane.

The operator of the Gulfstream is Donna Blue Aircraft, Inc. of Coconut Creek, Florida. Its address, according to the Florida Division of Corporations, is 4811 Lyons Technology, Coconut Creek, Florida 33073.

On June 10, 2006, WMR reported that the N987SA Grumman G-1159, Gulfstream II, was operated by S/A Holdings LLC and had been involved in the renditioning of prisoners to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

On April 21, 2006, WMR reported on a similar incident involving a plane connected with the U.S. government: "On April 10, Mexican police, acting on a tip from INTERPOL, seized a DC-9 aircraft carrying 5.5 tons of cocaine with an estimated street value of $100 million. The U.S.-registered plane was en route from Caracas, Venezuela, which, according to French intelligence, is a known hub for cocaine shipments from Colombia to Saudi Arabia. The DC-9 (registration number N900SA) made an emergency landing at Ciudad del Carmen in Campeche state. A Falcon aircraft that arrived at Ciudad del Carmen from Toluca airport in Mexico state in advance of the arrival of the DC-9 was also seized. The cocaine was contained in 128 suitcases. The Mexican police later claimed the unidentified DC-9's pilot managed to escape. However, the police did arrest the co-pilot. The DC-9 was painted in the familiar blue and white colors of the U.S. Transportation Security Administration with an official-looking seal with an American eagle bearing the inscription: 'Sky Way Aircraft - Protection of America's Skies.' The registered owner of the aircraft is: Royal Sons Inc., 15875 Fairchild Drive, Clearwater, Florida."


SLOPPY CIA DRUG PLANE

WORLD EXCLUSIVE
Oct 08, 2007
by Daniel Hopsicker

Seventeen months after an American-registered DC9 airliner was busted with 5.5 tons of cocaine, a major international scandal is brewing over a second drug trafficking incident in Mexico's Yucatan involving an American-registered jet owned by a  dummy front company of the kind usually associated with the CIA.

A weekend visit to “Donna Blue Aircraft Inc” of Coconut Beach FL.,  the company which FAA records show owned the Gulfstream II business jet (N987SA) which crash-landed with 3.7 tons of cocaine aboard in Mexico’s Yucatan two weeks ago, has revealed that the company’s listed address is an empty office suite with a blank sign out front.

There was no sign of Donna Blue Aircraft, Inc., at the address listed at the Florida Dept. of Corporations, 4811 Lyons Technology Parkway #8 in Coconut Beach FL. 

 

However, there were, oddly enough,  a half-dozen unmarked police cars parked directly in front of the empty suite.  

Phone calls to Butters Development, the industrial park's leasing agent, went unreturned.

Moreover the brief description of Donna Blue on its Internet page, apparently designed to “flesh out the ghost a little,”  is such a clumsy half-hearted effort that it defeats the purpose of helping aid the construction of a plausible “legend,” or cover, and ends up doing  more harm than good...

For example, the website features a quote from a satisfied Donna Blue Aircraft customer. Unfortunately his name is  “John Doe.” And the listed phone number is right out of the movies: 415.555-5555.  

Its known in the trade as "sloppy tradecraft."

 

The biggest clue to date to the true identity of the individuals or organization operating behind the dummy front of "Donna Blue Aircraft" may lie in its initials, "DBA," for "doing business as."

It is the kind of cute nomenclature for which "the boys" are known to be fond.

For the Bush Administration, which recently launched a PR offensive announcing major gains in the multibillion-dollar anti-drug effort in preparation for asking Congress for a $1 billion Plan Colombia-type aid package to help Mexico fight drug traffickers, the controversy could not have come at a worse time. 

The billion dollars in proposed U.S. aid, Mexican newspapers pointed out, will only be used to target drug traffickers with no obvious ties to American intelligence.

Leading to this extraordinary skepticism is the fact that recent investigations into downed drug planes have suffered, on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border, from a certain murkiness.

 

Mexican authorities and the American DEA have apparently  concluded that Mankind’s knowledge of the ownership of large commercial and business jets busted carrying multi-ton loads of narcotics is governed, like the understanding of the movement of subatomic quarks, by Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle.

The more influential the listed owner of the plane is, the more uncertain the identification becomes.  The whole business, suggested a story which ran on the Associated Press, quickly moves beyond the realm of human ken…

“How the U.S.-registered Gulfstream ended up in the hands of suspected drug traffickers remains a mystery,” reported the Associated Press.

How indeed? Let’s take a look.

When the company’s principals, Joao Luiz Malago and Eduardo Dias Guimaraes, both Brazilian, forcefully denied that they still owned the plane, claiming it had been sold several weeks earlier to two American pilots in Florida, officials at the DEA (which sent a six-man team to the Yucatan crash site) the FBI, and the FAA were all conspicuous by their silence.

Since then, there has been a growing perception expressed in the Mexican press that the owners of both of the American-registered drug plane’s seem to enjoy an apparent immunity from prosecution.


“The proprietary company of the unit, Donna Blue Inc. Aircraft (DBA), is another mystery and probably it is a ghost company,” reported Mexico City’s La Reforma.

Indications point to the conclusion that their skepticism is justified.

Increasing suspicion even more was the suggestion,  in a report of a committee of the European Parliament, that in addition to having been used in drug trafficking the Gulfstream II had flown CIA rendition flights to Guantanamo.

Unnamed authorities quoted in Associated Press accounts dismissed this report, saying there was no evidence the plane flew renditions, but failed to address the fact that  Guantanamo is highly restricted airspace, and any plane landing there can be presumed to be working for the U.S. Government.

What has raised the crash-landing of the Gulfstream II drug plane with U.S. Government connections to the level of real outrage is its extraordinary similarity to the DC9 airliner caught a year and a half ago, after which  the planes’ registered owner suffered no ill consequences from having his airplane caught with 5.5 tons of cocaine onboard.

There are “wonderful similarities,” Mexican newspaper Por Esto reported drolly, “between the Gulfstream which crash-landed in the tiny hamlet of Tixkokob and the DC9 busted in Ciudad del Carmen which help explain why, despite the fact that almost 18 months has passed, the American owner of the DC9 has not been charged with any crime.”


Ghost Fleets of Ghost Planes owned by Ghost Companies

The reference is to information contained in a series of articles in the MadCowMorningNews detailing connections between the DC9 and the national Republican Party, like its unpaid use flying current Florida Republican Senator Mel Martinez around the state during his last week blitz  before his election to the Senate in 2004.

The DC9’s owner was identified in FAA documents as Royal Sons’ Inc., owned by  Frederic Geffon of St. Petersburg.

Yet despite the fact that Geffon back-dated sales documents and then had them faxed to the FAA several days after his DC9 was already in the news for the big bust, no action has been taken against Geffon, or any other owners of the plane.

Geffon claimed he had sold the DC9, several weeks before it was caught,  and identified the buyer as an “airplane broker” in California who investigation revealed has no history of selling airplanes.

The circumstances of the subsequent “investigations” share many similarities. The governments involved—Mexico, the United States, Venezuela, and Colombia—all appear unable to agree on who owned the planes when they were busted.

In both cases Mexican authorities were quick to arrest individuals who authorities labeled crew members on the drug flights.


But the plane’s ownership has been made to appear “murky,” although the owners of the planes at the time they were caught are clearly named in FAA documents. And both plane’s American owners appear to be escaping Scot-free.

Could the confusion be deliberate?

An aviation executive in Venice thought so. "When it comes to registering airplanes, it’s the Wild West out there," he explained. “An airplane is a mobile, big ticket item. Yet there are no airport police doing ramp checks, or checking N numbers at airports.” 

“The FAA system for registering airplanes is little-changed from when it was started back in the good ol boy days of the 1930’s. Each plane has a paper folder, for example, stuffed with all correspondence regarding airworthiness and ownership relating to that plane.”

“Its an antiquated system which some feel is kept deliberately in place to encourage a certain ambiguity when a plane is interdicted. When a change of registration is mailed in, the FAA places a plane’s folder in what they call “suspense.”

“That’s a tremendous inducement to anyone with a chance of having a plane nabbed to keep floating sales in progress. The CIA, for example, is very adept at keeping files on its planes “in suspense.”

An airplane associated in some way with the U.S. Government, said an aviation source  with a smirk, would have definite advantages for a drug smuggler.


Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on...

The first incident—the DC9 “Cocaine One” saga studiously ignored in the American press, save for an error-filled apologia in the plane’s owners hometown St. Petersburg Times—dropped from sight quickly with no apparent serious ramifications.

Two weeks ago in the Yucatan, events took a similar turn. And both incidents now seem headed for similar outcomes.

Today only elements of the “wised-up” Mexican press are crying foul.  

After being owned for nearly a decade by ARI, Air Rutter International, the Gulfstream apparently changed hands-- at least two, and by one account, three--times in recent weeks.  

However the MadCowMorningNews has learned new details that throw suspicion on the claim that two American pilots in Fort Lauderdale Florida could have paid $2 million cash, as described by Donna Blue execs, for the Gulfstream II business jet...

It's a deadly game of musical chairs. What will happen when the music stops?

 

 
 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRtsJEVp-p0

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHcNMc5aPE8

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfQcyphK-Qo

 

 

although i don't agree with legalizing it as the prices would go down, more kids would get addicted,

and then people would demand a ban, and the prices would shoot up again with fivefold customers

ready to do anything for a fix.........here's the video

 

Feds raid Amish dairy and threaten action over raw milk sales

Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
July 30, 2010

The U.S. government gestapo is at it again in its crusade against raw milk. Recently, the jackboots swarmed a Pennsylvania Amish man’s private dairy farm for the second time, falsely accusing him of violating the ridiculous prohibition on selling raw milk across state lines.

Farmer Dan Allgyer’s farm was raided by the same agents who paid him a visit back in February, telling him both times that they were there for an “inspection”. Just like last time, the agents drove flagrantly past “No Trespassing” and “Private Property”, this time arriving around 4:30 a.m. when Allgyer’s family was still asleep and as he was preparing to milk his cows.

The group began to interrogate Allgyer, and served him a warrant claiming they had “credible evidence” that he was involved in interstate commerce involving raw milk. According to Allgyer’s personal account, upon being questioned as to why the agents were at the farm so early when the warrant clearly stated that it was valid only at “reasonable times during ordinary business hours”, one of them retorted that “ordinary business hours for agriculture start at 5 a.m.”

After scouring farm equipment and taking a bunch of pictures, the agents eventually left. But the next morning, Allgyer received an overnight, urgent letter from officials about “regulatory action” that would be taken if he failed to take “corrective action”.

  • A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Some people might not know this, but according to the precedent set by theWickard v. Filburn case, practically everything can now be considered to affect “interstate commerce” and thus fall under federal jurisdiction. In the little-known case, then President Franklin Roosevelt coerced the Supreme Court into supporting certain New Deal proposals that revolutionized the definition of “interstate commerce”.

Wickard v. Filburn had to do with a farmer who was growing too much wheatduring a time when there were wheat quotas. To make a long story short, the courts established that even growing your own wheat and feeding it to your cattle falls under the banner of “interstate commerce” because there is the potential to affect interstate commerce.

It is under this faulty premise that federal and state agents are challenging Farmer Allgyer and others who may be selling raw milk products directly to consumers. Though Allgyer is running a private farm, federal agents are operating on illegitimate precedent by accusing him of being involved in interstate commerce.

For more information about the case and to help fight federal government tyranny against foodfreedom, please visit the following link:

http://www.nicfa.com

Sources for this story include:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAG…

http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/20…

http://www.conservapedia.com/Wickar…

  •  
  • Social bookmarks
  •  
  •  
  • Email this article
  •  
  •  
  • Print this page
  •  
  •  
  • Share on Twitter

Comment Rules

Welcome Abz2000123

53 Responses to “Feds raid Amish dairy and threaten action over raw milk sales”

  1. andrew james Says: 

    Somebody elses’s problem. Me personally I’m trying to quit.

    Reply

    andrew james Reply:

    Milk sucks.

    Reply

    JFredMuggs Reply:

    When they came for the smokers I kept silent because I don’t smoke. When they came for the meat eaters I kept silent because I’m a vegetarian. When they came for the gun owners I kept silent because I’m a pacifist. When they came for the drivers I kept silent because I’m a bicyclist. They never did come for me. I’m still here because there’s nobody left in the secret police except sissies with rickets.

    Reply

    VaccinesCauseCancer Reply:

    exactly so many cowards on this forum and by the way raw organic milk is best source of calcium and most vitamins and minerals, pasterized even organic store milk is a poison. The gestapo is threating Amish since they are healthy and dont want to vaccinate themselves or they babies like other stupid white populations do, this is the reason of the insults

    Reply

    Robin Shadowes Reply:

    I only use it in coffee.

    Reply

    abz2000123 Reply:

    The group began to interrogate Allgyer, and served him a warrant claiming they had “credible evidence” that he was involved in interstate commerce involving raw milk.

    i was creasing up in my chair – these opium smugglers have gone a long way
    visit: abz2000.com/criminalwarsofaggression
    peace
    abz

    Reply

    They will be lovers of themselves Reply:

    his problem today is your problem tomorrow

    Reply

    andrew james Reply:

    I don’t milk cows though.

    Reply

    ready2rumble Reply:

    I dont drink milk. Its not really produced for humans. Yes, its a source of calcium, but on the other hand it also contains bovine mucus and bacteria that even Mansonto cant kill. However, milk is just a side issue. The Real issue here is your freedom to eat and drink whatever you desire. The federal govt and their business partners, the big corporations, dont want you eating anything they havent pissed in because they cant make profit if you eat food that they havent poisoned. every story has a point. Are we getting the real points of these news stories or just the point the media wants us to get? or are we just getting the shaft all the way around? analyze everything you see and read in the news. theres important truth hidden behind the words the media uses.

    Reply

    VaccinesCauseCancer Reply:

    u dint know the ancient human story that is why u r brainwashed by the vegetarian/evolution propaganda, we were made by aliens and yes we were given alien made food making animals like chicken,cows,pigs etc. Cows came from other planets they did not “evolve” here. Aliens (so called gods) were much smarter then us and checked the bio compatibility of these food with us even before they made us.

  2. roaddog6 Says: 

    when can we end all of their “laws”.

    Reply

    One answer Reply:

    When Money is no longer used.

    Reply

    anonymous007 Reply:

    When we ALL stand up and tell them to SHOVE IT!!! We don’t have to shoot, we just have to resist. A law is only enforcable if everyone adheres to it. They can’t even put us in FEMA camps unless we allow them to, or they kill the majority of us.

    Stand together, or die alone.

    Reply

  3. Pahana Says: 

    No wonder the drug trade just keeps growing…tax free economy.

    Reply

    ready2rumble Reply:

    the governments GOD: Gold Oil Drugs. How bout THEM apples!!!

    Reply

  4. the last patriot Says: 

    its quite a wonder when even the amish can’t hide from the FEDS.

    Reply

    ready2rumble Reply:

    WHY ARE YOU SURPRISED?

    Reply

  5. VinceB. Says: 

    the feds are rogue as are the politicians who, out of one side of their mouth take an oath to do one thing and then do the exact opposite out of the other side of their mouth when they cast their votes…

    the cycle really is diabolical on its face – the whole us verses them thing has got the whole thing going around in circles in which the snake really is eating its own tail…

    if we ever get to that point of cutting off the head of this snake consuming all of us (under the guise of “Protecting the Children” – or whatever bogus claim of it being for our own good…) is going to be painful: especially those who’ve come to depend upon the feds to do what the system they set up could never make good or deliver on; as was planned when the feds set it up…

    Reply

    VaccinesCauseCancer Reply:

    no u wrong the feds are really aliens themselves, and/or in complete control of the DC so called politician(bio robots) If u understand this all the puzzles will fall in one piece. And yes they after us to exterminate us.

    Reply

  6. muthrluvbne Says: 

    I was considering becoming Amish to get away from these jerk offs, but not even they are safe. Is it time YET?

    Our votes don’t matter, our signs don’t matter, or voices keep going unheard or ignored. Do our lives matter? Is it time YET?

    Get out of the game, get off of the grid, head for the hills, take a radio, CB, and all of the “protection” you will need. There is a gathering that will take place soon in the PNW. ALL and I do mean ALL are welcome. If you want to know more, reply to this message with some kind of contact info, and we can talk, and if you are OK then you will be given all of the info you need.

    Reply

    Morgan_Le_Fay Reply:

    The Amish will most likely be among the first targeted when the hard-core persecutions against religions not adhering to or synchronized with the NWO philosophy(eventual religion?) begin.

    Reply

    Robin Shadowes Reply:

    Since NWO is satanically motivated that is highly likely to come true. Since they don’t use modern technology they will be sitting ducks waiting to get plucked. Someone should tip them off about what is happening in the world so that they can prepare themselves for the coming persecutions.

    Reply

    One answer Reply:

    They already know.

    Reply

    VaccinesCauseCancer Reply:

    at least its good all the cops and fda workers getting vaccinated, they have 2 years to live after the latest shots, there is always the bright spot…

    They will be lovers of themselves Reply:

    they’re survival skills are top notch, they’ll probably outwit outlast and outplay most people

    Reply

    insanegarciaboy Reply:

    They kinda remind me of hobbits!

    ready2rumble Reply:

    unfortunately, the hills have eyes. There are soldiers in the mountains killing veterans of previous wars because these veterans have information that will bring this govt down and expose their tru plans. look it up. nowhere is safe from the govt

    Reply

    VaccinesCauseCancer Reply:

    time to leave this fascist land

    Reply

    abz2000123 Reply:

    and go to which place? which wont be attacked under the guise of “extremism” or harbouring “terrorists”?

    Reply