THE great cannabis debate is under way. At the end of it the drug might be completely decriminalised and be available just about everywhere ("I'll have my 'Evening Courier', a chunky Kit Kat and a packet of Black African Skank please, Mr Newsagent!"). It would be a remarkable thing if Britain did legalise hash, ganja, dope, reefers, spliff, splodge, plonk, wadge, or whatever slang term you prefer for the stuff. Amsterdam has its "coffee bars" but if we decide to go for the whole hog then we would be the first developed nation to become a drug autocracy. [continues 467 words]
As a former intelligence analyst for the Drug Enforcement Administration specializing in Mexican drug-money laundering methods and groups, I am responding to Holman W. Jenkins Jr.'s Jan. 27 Business World column "Washington Looks for Money Launderers Where They Aren't." Mr. Jenkins claims the U.S. government "was already in possession of, and resolutely ignoring, intelligence linking him [Raul Salinas] to drug money." I would be interested in knowing who possessed this information. Following the capture of Raul Salinas's paramour, Paulina Castanon, by Swiss authorities, after she tried to remove $80 million from accounts owned by Raul Salinas, the Swiss notified U.S. authorities, believing the money was tied to drug trafficking. The DEA was initially handed the investigation, and we scoured our vast intelligence indices and case files for any definitive link between Mr. Salinas and drug trafficking. Establishing such a "drug nexus" was critical to the continued detention by Swiss authorities of Ms. Castanon, and to charging Mr. Salinas with money laundering. Despite a thorough review, and to our dismay, we were unable to establish such a link. Money laundering is an exceedingly difficult charge to substantiate when suspected illicit funds cannot be directly connected to an underlying "specified unlawful activity," as U.S. law requires. [continues 205 words]
