From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Edit note

I have relocated the "DEA Drug and Money Laundering Cover-up" section off the article page.

"In 2004 former DEA special agent Sandalio Gonzales along with the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) approached Time magazine with a story of corruption at the highest levels within the DEA and the DOJ.[citation needed] The original story had started much earlier when several DEA agents with impeccable records had accused other agents in the Bogota office of assisting Columbian paramilitary forces in drug-running and money laundering activities.[citation needed] The agents who reported this were themselves retaliated against and the incident was covered up by the internal investigative bodies and the Department of Justice's Inspector General.[citation needed] A second internal report found that DEA agents in Colombia were in fact on drug traffickers' payrolls, some of these corrupt US officers were directly involved in helping Colombia's paramilitary death squads launder drug proceeds and that the implicated agents had been protected by "watchdog" agencies within the Justice Department.[citation needed] This paramilitary organization was in fact the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), which is known to have been responsible for murdering thousands of Colombians. This second report was also ignored which subsequently led[citation needed], presumably, to some agents decision to go public. But after initially fervent interest from reporters at Time, Tim Burger & Tim Padgett, in which they were provided with multiple internal documents fully backing the story[citation needed] as well as the testimony of numerous whistleblowers[citation needed], many of whom came forward at great personal risk, Time permanently dropped the story. To this day they have never offered any explanation.[1]

As it stands the referencing is inadequate and their is some additional but still limited referencing on the cited blog page. As it stands it is asking readers to take a lot of assertions at face value.

I was also left wondering whether the story has been reported anywhere in the five years since Gonzales and others approached Time. If not, I was wondering why that is the case.--Bob Burton 18:05, 11 June 2009 (EDT)