This is a neocon on drugs. Any questions?

A friend to this blog has (in a comment appended to the post below) directed my attention to this article, written by the notorious arch-neoconservative Michael Ledeen. Ledeen, among many other unsettling things, was one of leading voices in favor of the Iraq misadventure, although he later denied saying what he said. He also strongly implied that any mistakes made by Dubya in Iraq should be blamed on his female advisers. (And let's not even talk about the P2 thing.)

In his latest volcano of wisdom, Michael Ledeen offers his unusual view of the narcotics trade. Here is Ledeen on drugs:

There is a mounting body of evidence of a global alliance directed against the United States, running from Moscow to Tehran, Damascus and Caracas. United by hatred of America, funded by oil and narcotics revenues (including our own), and unanimous in their contempt for free societies, the leaders of Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Bolivia publicly declare their intentions and demonstrate their resolve.

Secretive flights from Tehran to Damascus and thence to Caracas arrive at a special area in the central airport, where men disembark, are not checked by immigration authorities, and are given Venezuelan passports. Containers are unloaded and do not pass through customs. Similar secrecy attends the return flights. Neighboring countries believe that many of the men are officials of Hezbollah, who then fan out across the region (and perhaps across our southern border) to recruit foot soldiers for their expanding terror bases, and we know, thanks to a paramilitary operation by the Colombians at the beginning of the summer, that Chavez’ regime provided Swedish anti-tank missiles to the Colombian terrorist group FARC. We also know, thanks to years of hard work by the DEA and South American partners, that Venezuela is a major transshipment port for cocaine and other narcotics. The drugs are sent to Africa, and then to Europe, and finally into the United States.

Right now, your head must be spinning so fast you could be trying out for the lead in the next Exorcist movie. Ledeen has proposed an insanely circuitous route for the transport of illegal drugs to the United States, a route that bears little resemblance to any I've heard previously described.

Let's see if I have this right: From the poppy growers of Afghanistan -- where our warlord allies have vastly increased heroin production ever since we showed up to run the place -- all of the stuff goes first to Tehran, where the government runs the worldwide narcotics trade -- even though Iran is a country hated by both the Afghans and the Americans. Of course, Iran just happens to be a place that Ledeen has long wanted to see toppled. (Israel, by pure coincidence, wants the same thing.)

Now, you'd think that the American occupiers of Afghanistan might be in a position to impede this massive traffic across the Iranian border -- but such, it would seem, is not the case.

The H then go Damascus, Syria, which does not border Iran; Iraq is in the way. (In other words, the H has to cross territory occupied by Americans. Ledeen doesn't tell you that part.) Syria just happens to be another country disliked by Ledeen, the neo-cons and Israel.

From Syria, the stuff (even the stuff intended for Europe) goes first to Venezuela -- always, always Venezeula -- another nation where the neocons want to see regime change.

From there, the shit all goes to Africa. Ledeen does not tell us exactly where in Africa. Maybe we should simply take over the entire continent, just to be on the safe side.

Finally, from Africa, the H goes to Europe and/or the United States. And Russia is also heavily involved. Ledeen does not really explain how.

All of the foregoing reminds me of the guy who re-traced the route of Phineas Fogg just to return his neighbor's hedge trimmer.

You may have noticed a story from earlier this year which undercuts Ledeen's theory. The UN has highly praised Iran for its staunch efforts to stop the blow of H from Afghanistan into Iran. See, for example, here:

More than 3,600 Iranians have been killed in gun battles with smugglers in the last 25 years and every year thousands of kilograms of heroin, opium and hashish stream through these porous mountain passes.

Keeping the smugglers out of Iran is an expensive business and the Iranian government is finding it hard to bear the financial burden. At a press conference with Antoinio Maria Costa, the governor of Sistan-Baluchistan requested more help from Europe.

A story of this sort might give naive people the impression that Iran wants international help in its fight against the drug trade. But wait -- how can this be? According to Michael Ledeen, Iran is secretly running that trade.

Ledeen's article hints at an explanation for this seeming discrepancy. Iran received praise from the UN, and the UN is, as the John Birchers always warned, thoroughly eeeee-vil. So evil, in fact, that Barack Obama should be condemned for "embracing" it. Or so sayeth Ledeen.

Now, I'm a Barry-basher from way back, but I can't help becoming much more sympathetic to our hapless prez when a bloody neocon like Michael Ledeen starts to screech his screwball anti-O conspiracy theories. Ledeen does not criticize Obama (as I do) for his refusal to nationalize the too-big-to-fail banks, for his snubbing of single-payer health insurance, or for his Dubya-esque policies on spying. No, Ledeen seems to have no problem with any of that. Ledeen's critique has a very different foundation: Obama is a traitor because he has not (yet?) called for war with Iran.

We know that Obama does not particularly like America, but failing to respond to a threat of these dimensions, not to mention actively helping our enemies, is grave indeed.

You know the old saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? Well, screw that. The neocons who gave us Iraq are going after Obama big time. Just because I don't like our foolish president doesn't mean I'm going to ally myself with the bloodthirsty creeps who, under Cheney and Bush, brought this nation to near-ruin.

One last word about Michael Ledeen. He is an unapologetic admirer of Machiavelli. And Machievelli was an unapologetic advocate of telling lies for "higher" political purposes. Mike, if you want the public to trust you, here's a clue: Ixnay on the Achievelli-May. Capice?