Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Elsewhere...

Dave Emory, the veteran theorist who sees Nazis, Nazis everywhere -- and to whom I've linked for lo these many years -- finally created a webpage that doesn't look quite so 1995. Much nicer. Big problem: You cannot easily reach this page (the catalog of audio materials) from the home page. At any rate, I suggest lending an ear to his interviews with Daniel Hopsicker, here and here.

Speaking of Hopsicker -- he seems to be back from his hiatus with a new piece. He deals with allegations that the American DEA is selectively prosecuting cocaine flights that aren't on the "protected" list.
"Mexican authorities acted based only on information from the United States,” Gutierrez told Reforma, pointing to evidence unearthed by this reporter’s investigation, which revealed the high-level Republican connections of the people selling planes to the Sinaloa Cartel.
Hopsicker directs our atention a money laundry used by Mexican drug lords -- a firm which was also used to channel funds to former Mexican president Vincente Fox.
Worse: The money was coming from DEHYDRATION TECHNOLOGIES INC., a dummy front company located in Alexandria, Virginia… right next door to the CIA.
This "Dehydration" stuff gets really interesting:
When reporters from Mexico City newspaper "La Reforma" visited Dehydration Technologies ‘headquarters’ in Belgium, they found that the company’s listed address was a private home, whose long-time residents had no idea what they were talking about, and had never heard of the company.

While there, they picked up a copy of the company’s financial statement, required to be filed by all companies "headquartered" in Belgium.

What immediately attracted their attention was that, for a firm with no visible product, sales, or even an office: Dehydration Technologies was moving a lot of money around.

Everybody's got to be good at something.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Am I dense and missing something, or am I the only person who's visiting for anything other than election coverage, or is there a conflict in the two paragraphs?

"the company’s listed address was a private home, whose long-time residents had no idea what they were talking about, and had never heard of the company.

While there, they picked up a copy of the company’s financial statement...."

How did they get a financial statement from a location which was a residence with no idea about the company which was registered at their address?

As always Joe, I feel this is the subject matter in which you excel - investigative journalism, rather than the progressive zeitgeist.

Anonymous said...

I believe the implication of that statement "while there ***(in Belgium) ***they picked up a copy of the company's financial statement..."

The reporter that picked it up was from Mexico- thus - he/she was visiting Belgium -which is explained. They picked up the filed financials from the Belgium gov. not from the "residence/address."
Anyway- sometimes I guess you have to draw it out real obvious, but I think Hopsicker attempted to do that with stating it was filed:

required to be filed by all companies "headquartered" in Belgium.

Hope that clears up the quandary.

Thanks Joe for diverging from the elections and getting into the news few will cover.
Keep it up!
austingggrrrrl