February 13, 2024 • 53 mins
Stubborn, determined and tenancious, Gary Webb was the quintessential investigative journalist. In his work for a newspaper called The Mercury News, Gary explored the relationship between right-wing revolutionary Contras in Nicaragua, the crack cocaine epidemic in the United States, and the actions of the Central Intelligence Agency. While the series was published, multiple mainstream newspapers joined together to write editorials criticizing him, and ultimately his own editors turned on him, as well. Gary Webb later died from two gunshots to the head. This was officially deemed a suicide, and there's no wonder people think there's more to the story.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back to the classics. Fellow conspiracy realist. If you
are a longtime listener, there is a name that you
know and know very well. No, not Intern Steve, although
shout out to him. Instead, we're talking about Gary Webb.
Who is Gary Webb? Or who was he?
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Yeah? How is he connected to Freeway? What is it Rick?
Not the Rick Ross rapper, but Freeway Rick Ross?
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Yeah, the guy who was actually moving lots and lots
of drugs allegedly according to his story for the government.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Yeah. Gary Webb's an investigative journalist who for a long
time worked for an outfit called the Mercury News. And
he is the guy who brought to the American public
the idea that the CIA was fueling the crack cocaine
epidemic in the United States. Ultimately, Gary Webb died from
(00:57):
two gunshots to the heads.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Deemed a suicide, well officially, but come on now, well
this feels weird to me. Let's look into it. By
the way, when every time I see the phrase Dark Alliance,
thankfully now I have this association to Gary Webb. But
it was a Balder's Gate video game that came out
(01:20):
a long time ago. That's right, called Balder's Gate Dark Alliance.
So then I imagined an isometric action adventure RPG. But
thankfully again Gary Webb is here to help us.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
Now I'm imagining both of them. What is Dark Alliance
really trying to tell us?
Speaker 3 (01:38):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies, history is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Hey, guys, I love the podcast and I'm usually a
huge fan of your work, but I have to say
I just listened to the Cryptids of Australia episode and
I was very disappointed. At the beginning you mentioned that
you did the Cryptid math. I can't believe no one
took this opportunity to say you did the monster math.
I expect better.
Speaker 4 (02:21):
That wasn't dad joke, missed opportunity.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
That was from Devin.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
My name's Matt, my name's Nol.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
They call me Ben. We are joined with our super
producer Paul Decktt. Most importantly, you are you. You are
here that makes this stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Matt.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
That was new was that you're trying something out, just
messing around.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
It's like a cold open kind of in a weird way,
unrelated entirely.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Just you know, calling us out for not doing the
monster math. It's cool.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Well, also calling us out for maybe not doing our
due diligence, which is something that's going to come up
a lot in this episode in particular. Right, you can
say all sorts of things, but can you prove them?
I don't know. Maybe let's start this way. So the
four of us live and record in the Atlanta area,
and Atlanta, in a huge burst of good news, has
(03:11):
a tremendous drug problem. Yeah, Like, as we're recording and
be sarcastic, but as we're recording this, not more than
three or four hundred yards away from the studio we're
in right now, there is more than likely someone on
a backstreet doing a hard drug of some sort, and
maybe on a main street. There are also probably several
(03:32):
people on street corners in the same vicinity selling these drugs.
And if you live in a large American city, areas
of your local metropolis almost definitely have areas where drug
problems are endemic and there are huge issues with trying
to address it. But here's the big question, where does
(03:54):
all of this come from? You know what I mean,
The local corner drug dealer is almost certainly not flying
to the Golden Triangle or flying to South America on
a weekly basis to sell somebody like heroin or cocaine
at ten bucks a pop. It's just the plane tickets
too expensive. It economically doesn't make sense.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Yeah, and that person or group of people selling drugs
on the corner aren't also on those flights purchasing the
large quantities of cocaine or whatever, then flying all of
that stuff back to the United States, then processing it
into let's say, crack cocaine, which is a process, and
then like you said, selling it for that low amount
(04:35):
of money.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Right. And there's an excellent study that Freakonomics did a
while back. We're big fans of Freakonomics that busted the
myth the drug dealers make tons and tons of cash.
Actually you would be. You might be incredibly surprised by
how little drug dealers, most drug dealers actually make.
Speaker 4 (04:55):
It kind of reminds me of that thing we talked
about ben off Mic about how little money bank robbers
probably make. You know, it's this notion that they're just
cleaning it up, but in fact, banks don't keep that
much money on hand, and to make a decent living,
like even like a relatively decent living, you would have
to your success rate would have to be one hundred percent,
and you would have to, you know, do a certain
(05:15):
amount of heists every.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Year with a certain amount of people, a certain amount
of people.
Speaker 4 (05:19):
Not that it's related one to one, but you'd think
that drug dealers, you know, there's this cliche notion that
they're raking in the cash. But I'm interested in your stats, Ben, Oh.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Well, yeah, there's there's the article from La Times that
it's literally titled why drug dealers live with their moms,
and it goes into what you're talking about here, how
very little most of the people actually selling the drugs make.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Now I don't want to. I can toot my own
horn a little bit on the bank heist thing too,
which I think they are related, mainly because I wrote
the video, but I think someone else appeared in it.
We did a brain stuff video way back in the
day about why you shouldn't rob a bank and you
can find the bank stats there, but they're they're sobering
and somber, and we see the same thing with drug dealers.
(06:05):
There's a quick excerpt we could read here the top
one hundred and twenty men on the Black Disciples pyramid.
That's the hierarchy of the gang. Right, we're paid very well,
but the pyramid they sat at top was gigantic. So
if you use this franchise from a guy named JT.
They mentioned earlier in the article, the franchise had three
officers and fifty foot soldiers. There were about five three
(06:29):
hundred people working for those one hundred and twenty bosses
at the top of the pyramid. And then there were
twenty thousand unpaid rank and file members, most of them
who were just vuying to become a foot soldier. And
how well did that foot soldier dream job pay when just.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Foot soldier job that these twenty thousand people.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Want, right, three dollars and thirty cents an hour, but
you don't have to pay taxes.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
And again this is written in two thousand and five,
and this is I believe that's when they were out
actually speaking with these people.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Mm hmm.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, So two thousand and five dollars.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
So clearly not enough for regular international travel. Where does
this stuff actually come from? How does cocaine enter the US?
How does heroin into the US and on and on
with these other drugs, especially when Uncle Sam ostensibly spends
(07:28):
billions and billions of dollars just trying to stop the
drug trade. How does it get here? One person thought
he found the answer, and he was an investigative journalist
named Gary Webb.
Speaker 5 (07:40):
So.
Speaker 4 (07:40):
Gary Webb was born on August thirty first, nineteen fifty five,
in Corona, California, and he wanted to be a writer
from a very early age, where for the student newspaper
at his college in Indianapolis. He ended up getting married
to him and named Susan Bell, and they went on
to have three kids together. And he first started getting
into investigative reporting when a piece appeared in the Kentucky
(08:03):
Post in nineteen eighty called The Coal Connection. It was
a massive series, a seventeen part series that he collabed
on with a guy named Thomas Sheffey that looked at
ben you might know more about this the conspiracy surrounding
a coal company. So he was already kind of early
on into whistleblowing and kind of like this sort of
deep dive truth telling, trying to expose the ills of society.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
Right right, similar to that wonderful journalist we interviewed a
while back, Mark Periskia I believe his name was correct, Yeah,
who did some fantastic work on the US government's arrangements
with spies in the era of civil rights. This guy
was a small town reporter who was breaking big stories,
(08:50):
and that.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Was a big deal, specifically about the assassination or the
murder of a president of this coal company, and how
this guy perhaps had some or he did have ties
to organized crime. Like that's no small thing. You don't
write about that and then not worry about writing about that.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
And as our friend Mark established earlier, the thing about
being an investigative journalist that's worth your salt is that
so much of the actual work is just verifying and
triple checking every single syllable of every single sentence that
is fit to print, and you have to do it
(09:32):
before it goes out to the masses. It turned out
that Gary Webb seemed to have a gift for this,
and that was just the beginning. His major work, the
one that most of us listening and probably familiar with,
is something called The Dark Alliance, And over the years,
several people have kind of muddied the water of his
(09:53):
research and what he actually claimed. So it's very important
for us to look at what he did do and
then also look at what he did not do precisely.
So here's here's the gist. In nineteen ninety six, Gary
Webb writes a series of three articles for The Mercury News,
which I believe was out in San Jose, San Jose.
So in these these three articles are pretty lengthy, and
(10:17):
later they're all collected into a book named The Dark Alliance.
This it's difficult to explain how much of an impact
this made, so let's just go with what he says.
In this series of articles. Gary Webb alleges and claims
that Nicaraguan contras are responsible for the Los Angeles crack
(10:38):
cocaine epidemic of the nineteen eighties.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
It's a bold claim.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Well, yeah and yeah, that they're responsible, but they're a
bunch of other hands.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Involved too, right, They're not working alone. He claims that
the US's Central Intelligence Agency, your CIA, knew this was
going on, knew there was an active and elaborate and
very very robe bust drug trafficking network there, and at
the very least, he says, the CIA ignored it. At worst,
he says they may have helped them actively covered up
(11:11):
the crimes, met with the drug.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Lords, provided transportation.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Provided transportation. Shout out to what Air America, that's the one.
So these allegations were pretty harsh, as you said, a
bold claim, But the thing is they weren't far fetched.
In South and Central America, it's not unusual for these
separatist or revolutionary groups to turn to the drug trade
(11:36):
as a way to raise some cash. Other groups have
done it too, like FARC or the Shining Path and
actually met FARK representatives who were very much against that process.
So all goes back to documentation, right, Gary Webb builds
this case and he argues, somehow, as opposed to all
(11:57):
the other drug running operations on that continent, somehow the
contras are able to get cocaine into the US and
then most importantly get cash out with a lot less
of a hassle than other cartels or drug runners.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Well, yeah, so they're saving a ton of money somehow
in this whole process, in the transportation, right hm. And
what that's allowing them to do, and this is where
it gets really bad for people who live in the
United States. This allows these groups to sell their product
at a much much lower price than their competitors.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Right, so you can't. It's like what a mom and
pop store is trying to compete with a huge, big
box chain grocery store. They have the economy of scale
that allows them to sell an apple for fifty cents,
whereas the mom and pop stores to sell it for
a dollar.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
And why would you buy your apple for a dollar
when you know you can get it for fifty cents.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
Maybe it's some more delicious apple.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
It's the exact same apple, my friend.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
I don't know. Maybe if you pay more for it,
it tastes better.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
There's a study with wine that absolutely proves that, Yeah,
that is true, calling out all samall yea's we'll go
ahead and maybe publish that study on wine on Here's
where it gets crazy later.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
But what if you're addicted to apples? Like, addicted to apples?
Are you still going to pay a dollar?
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Well?
Speaker 4 (13:21):
I don't know, I mean it depends right, Like are
you a connoisseur.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Of apples or are you just eating like any old
crab apple to scratch that unscratchable itch.
Speaker 4 (13:29):
Yeah, there's different layers, there's different there's a hierarchy of addiction.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Right, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say
the crack epidemic probably was going more towards.
Speaker 4 (13:40):
The crab apples.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
Yeah yeah, crack apples also just an unnecessary point here.
I feel like red Delicious Apple is like a terribly
ironic name because those are terrible apples.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
I don't like them either.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
They're kind of mushy. Yeah, you know, I don't get it.
Fuji apples all day.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
For me, it's Granny Smith.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Andy Smith. I would not have figured you for a
fan of tartness.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
It's my favorite.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
What about that? Mean, man, it's a it's a tart apple.
Speaker 4 (14:07):
No, I know, but why would you? Why would you
not think that Matt was a fan of tartness.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Because Matt's Matt's palette runs more toward spicy. He's exploring extremes.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
That's exactly what it is.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
Interesting.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
My favorite tart is a Carl tart.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Though it's well done, well done, but uh but the
character the argument still stays the same, right, Like he says,
obviously this, obviously someone is influencing the game that the
(14:43):
cartels are playing down there, and I have he says
proof that the CIA is either again either ignoring it,
maybe helping it, has met with cartel leaders and so on.
But what before we get too far, let's ask her
ourselves what he actually did not do After a word
(15:04):
from our sponsors.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
And we're back. So, the one thing that Gary Webb
did not do by discussing these things in his three
part series that would become The Dark Alliance, what he
didn't do is break this story. He wasn't the first
person to talk about America's crack coming from other places,
perhaps the contras, like specifically the Nicaraguan Contras, with perhaps
(15:34):
the CIA's approval. This was something that had already been
kind of floating around. It was a theory in a way.
He was just backing up these beliefs with some facts,
or at least with as close to facts as he could.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Get, kind of fleshing out the picture.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Right, Yeah, he's given you the details. He's zooming in
with the camera a little bit.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
There we go. I like that he never claimed to
have evidence that the CIA engineered the entire thing correct,
only that they knew something was going on, they tacitly
approved of it, and that they met with contra leaders
and funders to talk about the money.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
Yeah, the fact of the matter is that there were
a lot of kind of wild theories that shot off
from this reporting. And I know we'll get into some
of this little bit more, but Web was sort of
discredited and then sort of indicated, and he's been a
very divisive figure in terms of like how rigorous his
fact checking was for some of this stuff. There's a
(16:32):
piece an op ed in the Washington Post by they
named Jeff Lean from twenty fourteen, who was their assistant
managing editor, and he basically you should read it for yourself.
It's very interesting, but he kind of goes through in
shreds Web in terms of his abilities as a investigative
reporter and said that he makes all of these incredible
claims and that in order to make incredible claims like that,
(16:55):
as a journalist, you have to have incredible evidence, right,
and he doesn't exist well.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
And then also what role do the editors play in that.
I'm glad you mentioned twenty fourteen because that's an important year.
But let's let's get to the reaction of the initial
publication too. So the media does conflate what Web is saying,
as as we mentioned, they say that Web is saying
the CIA did it. Did it all smoking gun caught
(17:22):
red handed. It was the CIA with the crack cocaine
in the living room.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
As though they invented the substance for some nefarious purpose,
to try to manipulate in the population into behaving a
certain way, or to incarcerate black men unfairly.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Right, the biggest thing is that they were saying that
Web was saying. The news is saying that Web is
saying that the CIA is literally the drug dealer, which
he did not. He did not say that. I totally
get that.
Speaker 4 (17:51):
I mean, it's and you know, it's kind of what
we're experiencing now with the quick turnaround of like internet reporting,
where it's very easy to conflate something in a properly
research story and turn it into something else for your
own purposes. Wouldn't have thought that would have been happening
quite to this degree back then, But yet here we are.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
This is back when the news was all made by
like organic meatbags called humans rather than bots and botnets,
you know what I.
Speaker 6 (18:17):
Mean, and the day but then the days before deep fakes,
which is a scary thing, right, Yes, so you're absolutely right, guys.
He he did get conflated.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Now.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Well, and there's a whole other thing we're gonna talk
about in there about Gary web sources, right, and the
people he was talking to that he couldn't actually cite
as being the source.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Because they were so off the record. And then also
on a related thing that we have to get to
maybe in a future episode, it's pretty easy to prove
that on some level, the federal government, through multiple agencies,
has been targeting the black community for a long time.
I mean, the same amount of cocaine and the same
(19:02):
amount of crack cocaine carry wildly different minimum mandatory incarceration terms, right,
Why would that.
Speaker 4 (19:11):
Be Hmmm, Matt's making sort of a smushed up face
right now.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It's very Hollywood. That's your Charlie Day in front of
the conspiracy law chain smoking accusation. I mean, it's a
good question though, and the reaction is immense. This is
actually one of the first national security stories to really
(19:39):
blow up online to get people in the normal mainstream
America intensely interested. It's twenty thousand words long. It enrages
black communities who are wondering, why are these epidemics happening?
Why does it seem like there's more government punishment or
(20:00):
harassment of the community rather than government assistance of a
community in trouble. And then there are congressional investigations excuse me,
congressional hearings.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Yeah, congressional hearings. But some of the biggest, at least
most widely seen hearings or seen on television occur just
within smaller communities within LA and other cities like that,
where there are people filling a room, a huge room,
and they are just asking people how long have you
(20:31):
known about the CIA dealing drugs? Like did you know
that CIA was dealing drugs? And they're asking their city officials,
and they're asking big names who are supposed to be
in charge of things.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
And again, Webb is in his you can see interviews
with him as well, where he essentially says that he
doesn't think the CIA was like wringing its hands Monty
Burn's style and saying, oh you know what I mean. Yeah,
He says, instead, they just really wanted money, and they
(21:02):
wanted off the books money anyway, Like if it hadn't
been this, it would have been something else.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
They couldn't officially use the government's money to pay for
what they were trying to do.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
Because that's back when that kind of policy or law
actually stopped people from doing that sort of thing.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Have we talked much about what the Contra affair was
and why they were interacting with these militants who were
like they were kind of like rogue militants. Basically, what
was the benefit there?
Speaker 1 (21:31):
Mentioned in a previous episode, But I think you're right,
we should go ahead and just just give you the
quick and dirty.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
Right.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
It's also called Iran Gate, which is interesting, but here
in the US we usually call it.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
The Iran Contra affair at the Thomas Crown affair.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
Yeah, So essentially, what are the contras.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Men, Well, they were a group in Nicaragua and their
whole point, or at least for the United States purposes,
they were going to at least attempt to throw the
Sandinista government.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
Which were socialist exactly. These are right wing rebel groups.
So the US government tends to support right wing insurgents
much more often than say left wing or anti capitalist insurgents. Basically,
people are pro resource extraction tend to historically, I'm not
(22:23):
saying now, but tend to historically get more support from
the US government.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Yeah, and it's one of those things if everyone, if
everyone in a country is getting to kind of share
the wealth in a more you know, sometimes communists, sometimes
socialists structures that occurs where everyone gets a little peace.
It's not so great when you could just control it
from top.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
Down, oh man. Of course, the top down approach.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Of course, the infamous top down. So that sounds weird
when you see it that way. Yeah, sorry, miss top down,
But all right. So the Iran contra affair occurs when
the National Security Council of the US gets involved in
secret weapon transactions and other activities that are prohibited by Congress.
So Ronald Reagan, the Reagan administration, that's probably a better
(23:14):
way to say it. The Reagan administration at the time
is very concerned that communism will spread throughout Central America
and challenge the capitalists or liberal hierarchy, that is, you know,
challenge the hegemonic status. So the people of Nicaragua were
particularly the Satinista Liberation movement they mentioned earlier in nineteen
(23:38):
seventy nine, they overthrow the president who is actually a dictator.
And now the Reagan administration is having there come to
Jesus moment, as they would say in the South. So
he thought this would eventually threaten the security of the
United States. Remember we're still in the Cold War era
at this time, and so the Reagan administration pushed huge
(23:59):
amount of some military aid into not just Nicaragua, but
other governments and other places that have civil wars and
gorilla fighting in hopes of preventing a left wing government.
And in the case of Nicaragua, they wanted to destabilize
that government and engineer and overthrow. So why is Iran
(24:21):
in there, right?
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Iran? I don't understand.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
So they sold anti tank and anti aircraft missiles to Iran,
believing that if they sold the missiles to Iran, Iran,
through its PROXYHBLAH, would allow hostages in Lebanon to be released.
This is already very rupe. Goldberg sat so much, and
so a portion of the money that Iran paid for
(24:46):
was diverted and then given to the contrast. A lot
of this occurred under the supervision of a man who's
very familiar to everyone, Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North.
Speaker 2 (24:58):
You may remember him from that famous hearing. Yeah it
wasn't a hearing. I don't even know exactly what it was,
but you can see video of him just admitting to
this stuff.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
And feels like he did the right thing to stop
the the ultimate war of ideology between the West and
the communist countries. So the problem with this stuff is
that while they're raising this money for the Contras, they're
violating something called the Bowland Amendment BOLA and D, a
(25:28):
law that was passed in nineteen eighty four that banned
direct or indirect military aid to the contrast. So they're
moving money in a sleazy way, yep, but they think
they're doing the right thing.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
It's just a different kind of shell game.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
It's kind of like, Yeah, it's kind of like the
idea that the ends justify the means, or that there
is a difference between what is legal and what is
morally correct, and they felt like they were doing the
moral thing. Okay, so that's around. Does that?
Speaker 4 (25:56):
Yeah, man, Yeah it does. And I knew some of
that but not all of that. But it sounds to
me like the accusation here is that they would go
to any means necessary to prop up this militant group
that was potentially going to do good for our government
in deposing this kind of pesky regime that was in
place that was inconvenient regime, right, absolutely, and that would
(26:19):
extend as far as Web's concern to funneling drugs in
the United States knowingly in order to funnel some of
that money into this cause that needed to be off
books money, right, great.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Black budget stuff. Yeah, And so this accusation lights a
flame under the American public and in a strange, not unprecedented,
let's call it that not unprecedented show of solidarity. Various
papers of note excoriate Web, the Washington Post before twenty fourteen,
(26:54):
Like back when this was released, the Washington Post is saying,
there are huge problems with the reporting, there's huge errors.
Why can't you cite who said that? Why can't you
prove this claim that you're making? And then Web would
go back and say, why I didn't make that claim?
But he can't compete with New York Times.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
And in turn, Jerry sepos chepos I believe, who was
the executive editor of The Mercury News, the paper that
this piece was, the series of pieces were published in
kind of threw Web under the bus, and he said, quote,
we oversimplified the complex issue of how the crack epidemic
in America grew through imprecise language and graphics because there
are a lot of infographics in this piece as well,
(27:32):
we created impressions that were open to misinterpretation. And that's
the kicker, because it was that misinterpretation. Maybe Web didn't
go quite as far as as some people might think
if you actually read the work. But there's some quotes
in here I I want to throw out too, to
see what you guys think. But it was those other
more quick to jump on a hot story, news outlets
(27:53):
that kind of really just kind of made stuff up
from whole cloth.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Right, you can't defend yourself against the claim that you
did not make other than saying you did not make that.
And if you don't have a large enough microphone or platform,
you're just not going to get your rebuttal out there.
I mean, rebuttals and corrections are some of the most
seldom read parts of any newspaper, and this a lot
(28:18):
most of this is occurring in newspapers at the time.
Although Web was prescient enough to put his work online
real quick.
Speaker 4 (28:25):
He made a website. He did the surrounds these pieces
like early On, which was which is not as much
of a thing back then.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
Right, it was very as I say, he's very much
an early adopter, and the communities that needed to find
out about this, he actually drove a lot of them online.
People who ordinarily wouldn't have cared about this found it
as a safe way to arrive at information they felt
the government was trying to hide. It turns out. I
want to go just quick to back to twenty fourteen,
(28:54):
where the Washing Post republished or they published another criticism,
which I I think is the op ed you're going
to read from NOL. The CIA at the same year,
on September eighteenth, released a ton of documents spanning thirty years,
three decades, and a lot of it confirmed confirmed stuff
(29:15):
Gary Webb had argued. They show at least that there
was collusion to in backstage, smoky room style collusion to
try to suppress the story. One of the things that
was released.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
This is in twenty fourteen.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
M One of the things that was released was an
article that was six pages long titled Managing a Nightmare,
CIA Public Affairs and the Drug Conspiracy Story. So this
you can find this online. This looks at how the
CIA reacted to what it saw as a huge public
relations crisis or catastrophe and then showing that the agency
(29:55):
actually didn't have to do much to extinguish the public
outcry press the story, because you see, as we said,
as I said, there are moments of not unprecedented solidarity
among papers of note, at least here in the US,
probably in your country as well. Sometimes that happen, not
all the time, but sometimes that happens because they have
(30:16):
a relationship behind the scenes that you as the public,
will never see with intelligence agencies in that country. So
the CIA essentially contacts their higher ups in the world
of media and publishing and they say, look, let's all
vultroun up together.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
On get on the same page everybody.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Like in jfk Assassination.
Speaker 4 (30:39):
Can I read a quote from yeah, web Pieces.
Speaker 2 (30:41):
Before you do that? Just noting in that same year,
twenty fourteen, that's when the Jeremy Renner movie Kill the
Messenger comes out. That's right, that's all about the Gary Webster.
Speaker 4 (30:50):
Do you guys see that. Yes, I hadn't even heard
of it. Oh, it's is again.
Speaker 2 (30:54):
I really liked it, but only because we had done
a video on it in the past. I knew the story.
Speaker 4 (30:58):
We're getting a lot of push I mean, it's I really.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Enjoyed it had a built in audience.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Yeah, fair enough.
Speaker 4 (31:07):
I just want to play out a couple of these
some of these claims that I think are interesting when
you read them. In one place from Gary Webb's Dark
Alliance trilogy of articles that ultimately became a book. Quote,
thousands of young black men are serving long prison sentences
for selling cocaine, a drug that was virtually unobtainable in
black neighborhoods before members of the CIA's army started bringing
(31:28):
it into South Central in the nineteen eighties at bargain
basement prices. So, I mean, it is hyperbolic as hell.
And the guy who wrote this op ed. The guy
was talking about earlier, the twenty fourteen anyway, Jeff Leen,
who was the assistant managing editor for The Washington Post.
He calls that a nut graph, which I had never
heard of. And I love this. And this is how
(31:50):
he sums that up. What a nut graph is. He says,
this was one of the most difficult things for a
reporter to write, because you have to summarize some very
out landish, outrageous facts and synthesize you know, the truth
behind it, and somehow you know paint in the often
(32:11):
contradicting notions behind it.
Speaker 1 (32:14):
It's kind of like writing a blurb before the story's
telling the audience why should I read this exactly?
Speaker 4 (32:20):
But it's also you know, he says, this is kind
of where web went off the rails and went a
little too far, and he ultimately resigned from his position
and was never hired again by any mainstream newspapers of
note rights. And he just kind of went rogue and
did his own thing. But he already kind of set
the tone for doing that by making that website. Now
(32:41):
he had this book, and he obviously had people that
believed him and probably had a following outside of the
mainstream press.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
Yeah, and also, you know, if the Internet had been
more prominent at the time, things might have gone differently
for him. He was also notoriously stubborn and at times
difficult to work with. He started blaming his editors pretty quickly,
so things became acrimonious between the Mercury editors and himself,
but it did lead directly to a Senate subcommittee hearing
(33:13):
where John Kerry was a senator at the time, investigated
the AP's findings from the Associated Press, and they released
in nineteen eighty nine, a report that was more than
one thousand pages. It said it found quote considerable evidence
that the Contras were linked to running drugs and guns
and the US government knew about it. So that would
(33:33):
mean that on that base level, some of what Web
is saying is true. But the way that he's using
these very highly dramatic phrases like calling the Contras the
CIA's army, you know what I mean, that's that for
a lot of investigators, that makes it tougher to believe
(33:55):
these other claims. So you're probably wondering why we're speaking
about Gary Web in the past tense. And I know
we're jumping around a lot right now. I guarantee you
that previously we had a nice little timeline for painting
the story. We've got a picture here. We're talking about
Gary Webb in past tense because after all this stuff
is occurring, he is largely considered to have failed his profession.
(34:18):
He's essentially blacklisted from any job that he would want,
and he's dire need of money. His characters being attacked
and stuff. On December tenth of two thousand and four,
he was found dead with two thirty eight caliber gunshot
wounds to his head in his home in Carmichael, California,
which he had just had to put on the market.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
Because he couldn't afford the mortgage.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
Right, because he couldn't afford the mortgage. Now, the coroner
ruled that this death was a suicide. And Webb's ex wife,
remember we noted her earlier, Susan Bell, She said that
he had been very depressed after a falling out with
his former employers at the Mercury, and a lot of
people believe that being professionally discredited drove him to suicide
(35:01):
and that his claims in the Dark Alliance were at
the very least exaggerated, if not made up. So the
question is, you know what happened. Did he break ethical boundaries?
Did he false fi information in order to sell a
juicy story, could he not prove his claims his professional
failure lead him to take his own life? Or is
there more to the story.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
And we're going to talk about that right after a
quick word from our sponsor.
Speaker 1 (35:32):
Here's where it gets crazy, Olhthough not really, because.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
We kind of jumped ahead. It's okay, it's okay.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
But so Gary Webb was right, he was correct, at
least partially but probably but probably not all the way correct, because,
as Lean says in that post op ed, you have
mentioned nol Gary Webb was no journalism hero. Despite what
kill the Messenger says, as Lean pointed out, there are
a lot of things that are hyper, a lot of
(36:00):
things he can't support. But we have to mention not
only was he at least partially right, but despite the
hooplah and the controversy and character assassination, everybody knew that
he was right beforehand because two other journalists had figured
this out in nineteen eighty five, more than a decade
before the Dark Alliance, journalists Robert Perry and Brian Barger
(36:24):
or Barker, found and proved that Contra groups were trafficking
cocaine to help finance their war in Nicaragua, which the
US also wanted to happen. And then after they came
out with that, the Reagan administration launched a behind the
scenes campaign to assassinate their character, remove their credibility as journalists.
(36:47):
And it was an attempt to discredit any reporting on
Contras and drugs. And there's an article by guy named
Peter Kornblow who was writing for the Columbia Journalism review
from nineteen ninety seven, who says whether the campaign was
the cause of this suppression or not. Coverage of the
story was minimal, but it did happen.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Proved and it's crazy to think about this now, But
on March fourth, nineteen eighty seven, the then President Reagan
came out after not speaking to the American people for
a long time during this whole Iran contra just scandal,
I guess, is what you would call it. He came out,
and he gave a speech, and let's just listen to
(37:31):
one tiny little piece of that.
Speaker 5 (37:33):
First, let me say I take full responsibility from my
own actions and for those of my administration. As angry
as I may be about activities undertaken without my knowledge,
I am still accountable for those activities. As disappointed as
I may be and some who served me, I am
still the one who must answer to the American people
(37:54):
for this behavior. And as personally distasteful as I find
secret bank accounts and to funds, and as the Navy
would say, this happened on my watch. Let's start with
the part that is the most controversial. A few months ago,
I told the American people I did not trade arms
for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell
(38:16):
me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell
me it is not.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
So this was a big deal in Americans' minds. People
knew about it. The President is going on television and saying, hey,
I didn't know this was happening. It was happening, but
I didn't know what was happening. Everybody's cool, Okay, we'll just.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
Move forward, like plausible deniability or genuinely sincerely saying this
occurred without my knowledge.
Speaker 2 (38:41):
Either way, he is already telling you in nineteen eighty seven,
this is happening, and.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
It's kind of It's interesting. I really appreciate you play
that clip because it's something that is somewhat plausible, because
if you are at that high level, if you're the president,
then a lot of things that you say are directives
that are well what sometimes in corporate jargon we refer
to as the forty thousand foot view. Yeah, it's like saying, well,
(39:08):
make sure that communism doesn't spread in South and Central America. Okay,
that sounds good, but you haven't. If you leave all
the details up to other people, you have no idea
what they're going to do. You have maybe a reasonable
expectation that they will obey the law, but other than that,
it's give me results.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
How badly does that person want to prove, like, do
what you want them to do and make themselves look
good in your eyes as the president? Because you just
you don't know where that line is for everybody. It's
different for everyone.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
And this leads to a question that I think a
lot of people are still debated. We said, we said
that his death was ruled as suicide, right, Yeah, we
know that. We know that he died from two gunshot
wounds to the head. A lot of people even today
believe that Gary Webb was actually murdered and then his
death was portrayed as a suicide to cover up further
(40:05):
research you might have published. I mean, what do you
guys think about that? Ever you've been reading.
Speaker 2 (40:09):
This, Yeah, there were a lot of rumors that he
was perhaps working on another piece, another story, something bigger.
Those are almost all rumors, almost all of them. And
then everything you hear from his wife, and specifically from
his wife at the time, just about the deep depression
that he was suffering from in those moments right before
(40:32):
he died. Hm, it does make you think perhaps this
was a suicide. It just points to it, right, But
let's just take a moment and put ourselves in his shoes.
Imagine that you're a journalist. You're being contacted by people
varying people of varying levels of involvement within the United
(40:53):
States government and or clandestine organizations. They are telling you
stories about things that have occurred. They're giving you specifics
about stuff that's already in the public domain. It's stuff
that's known, but they're giving you the full story. And
simultaneously they're telling you you cannot publish my name you.
No one can ever know that I'm talking to you.
(41:15):
This cannot happen. And you are publishing these stories out
because this is your big break. This is something that
feels very important. There are thousands and thousands of lives
being affected by what these people are telling you, right,
It is an important story to tell. The pressure that
Gary Webb was feeling and must have been feeling to
(41:37):
put those stories out that would become dark Alliance. I
cannot fathom what that must have felt like, but I
know for sure that it was heavy. It was a
heavy burden to bear for him, and it affected his
family life and it affected his mental health in some way.
Speaker 4 (41:53):
Are there any indications that he got death threats and things?
I mean, I would just assume so with being that
public and such a divisive anti government story.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
That's a good question depending on who you believe.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
Right if you watch the movie, is definitely portrayed a lot.
Speaker 1 (42:07):
But well also in the movie, in the film Killing
the Messengers, I heard it described in a review as
it's a retelling of the Gary Web story in a
place where everyone in a universe where everyone in the
world is wrong except for Gary Web.
Speaker 2 (42:23):
Everybody believes Gary. Yeah, exactly exactly where Gary Web is right.
But just from in I just I'm trying to identify
with him, maybe a little more than I should, But
I can imagine a place where being discredited after having
such strong feelings about it being real and being important,
(42:44):
would take a huge toll on not only your self
esteem and self worth, but your ability to continue on.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
And one thing that a lot of people see as
a smoking gun here is the fact that he died
from not one, but two yes shots to the head.
You might be surprised by how many people who attempt
that sort of process do end up giving themselves ultimately
a non fatal injury. But you know, it's never it's
(43:14):
never going to be pretty. But one of one of
the gunshots was through his cheek. Yeah, so they believe
that maybe he missed and then went for a second shot.
But because of that, because of the idea that two
gunshot wounds the head, seemed unusual to a lot of people,
(43:35):
the majority of whom are not forensic investigators. Obviously, there's
this huge outcry and local reporters end up going to
Sacramento County and they say, okay, what go on record,
tell us what is this? And the coroner at the time,
a guy named Robert Lyons, said, it is unusual. It
is a suicide. It's unusual in a suicide case to
(43:57):
have two shots, but it's been done in the past.
It's in fact a distinct possibility. So he's saying it's
definitely suicide. This has happened before, and that explanation is
not good enough for people who thought there was more
to the story, you know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yeah, Well, there are you can hear versions of this
story or read them online. Where he was attempting to leave,
he was trying to get away, he was trying to
sell his house. He was trying to leave and he
was cocked before he could leave by whatever in nefarious forces.
These claims have a zero evidence to back them up,
(44:34):
but it you know, it's tough for me to completely
discount them. But at the same time, it seems a
lot less plausible than the official story.
Speaker 1 (44:44):
So here's yeah, and here's another question, just to show
both sides here. If it was some sort of murder
and if it was related to his investigations in the
Dark Alliance, then why did they wait eight years after
the publication of the book for him to take him
(45:05):
out of the picture. The timeline is just strange.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
Yeah, the claims I've seen were that he was working
on something else outside of the Dark Alliance, which is
why it got him killed.
Speaker 1 (45:17):
And this argument in this discussion, this controversy continues in
the modern day in twenty eighteen, as we record this
in one of many of the American cities that still
battle drug problems. Where's it all coming from? Is someone
helping them out? Both sides of the argument. A lot
(45:39):
of prominent papers do continue to attack Gary Webb's claims,
or attack is a strong word, they take it apart
piece by piece and say it didn't prove this. This
is as you said earlier in old hyperbolic statement. And
on the other side of this, and these are great
valid points too, but on the other side, continuing releases
(46:01):
of government documents keep supporting aspects of what he has said.
Speaker 2 (46:07):
Yeah, small little pieces.
Speaker 1 (46:08):
So it's there's no two ways about it, no bones
about it. It's old beans to say it, but we
should admit the Dark Alliance does have several several prominent
errors that could be critical to you know, like a
critical wound to the argument in the book. But CIA
documents released from the agency at least confirmed chunks of it.
No one is arguing that the CIA showed often a
(46:32):
very strange disinterest in the drug trade. Yeah, but how
involved or not involved were they will future declassified documents
vindicate web from Beyond the Grave? Did the was the
murder something more indirect by ending his career? You know,
it's like, did the CIA commit the murder and it
(46:53):
was Gary Webb that pulled the trigger? M M it's
I mean, it's a different way you look at it.
Speaker 2 (46:58):
But well, something you think about because that strategy of
disinformation by giving a lot a lot of information to
someone where almost all of it is true but a
couple are not true, or almost all of it is untrue,
but a couple of things are true, right that, And
it makes you wonder if the way, especially if you
(47:21):
look at it with the large chunks of unsupported claims
that are in there, it makes you wonder if he's
speaking to one or two people out of the groups
of people, who is giving him incorrect information on purpose
in order to in the future discredit him, which, like
you said, Ben would then eventually lead to two gunshots
to the head self inflicted.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
What do you what do you think?
Speaker 4 (47:44):
It's very suspicious circumstances. I really, you know, it's like
cobaine level suspicious circumstances. You know, I don't know. I
don't care for it.
Speaker 1 (47:54):
It's definitely it definitely has something something off about it.
But the thing is as well, if you are the
central intelligence agency, wouldn't you have the wherewithal to make
a death look like an accident?
Speaker 2 (48:07):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (48:08):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (48:09):
Well maybe, And here's the other thing. If you're taken
out by let's say, portions of the narcotics world, so
higher ups in the drug you know, the drug I
don't want to call them companies. What do you call organizations? Sure,
these narcotics organizations. It's probably also not going to be
that clean of a murder.
Speaker 1 (48:30):
Perhaps there's that it could be maybe sending a message,
but it could have just been a suicide. I again,
going back to this, make it look like an accident thing.
It's a tragic truth that fatal car accidents happen multiple
times every single day in this country. Yeah, and in
most countries with dense populations and pedestrians and vehicles. So
(48:55):
I'm still undecided. I know that the official story says
that it was a suicide. His ex spouse said it
was a suicide. It is possible to shoot yourself twice
in the act of committing this, But don't I want
to Let's what do you think, fellow conspiracy realist, to
tell us, tell us your take on this.
Speaker 2 (49:17):
It just makes you Here's my plea to anyone listening
to this who wants to be an investigative journalist or
is an investigative journalist. If if you are working on
anything that becomes highly important ever in your life, please
whatever the circumstances are, No, it's never bad enough to
where you need to take your own life. Just know
(49:40):
that it's never going to get that dark. It cannot.
You are worth it, stick around and these kind of
claims won't have to be looked at in the future.
Speaker 4 (49:51):
And of course, I mean if you are feeling even
remotely in that way, there are people that can help.
I mean, there's the suicide Prevention Hotline, and you can
find a social worker or some kind of group where
you can talk to people that are going through similar
things than you. I mean, at the risk of sounding
cheesy and hyperbolic, I mean, you're never as alone as
you might think. And I say that as someone who's
(50:12):
dealt with suicide in my life and people with suicidal aviations,
and it's absolutely not the end all be all, even
if it feels that way.
Speaker 1 (50:21):
Well said, and I don't think that's hyperbolic or cheesy
at all. I think that was very well said. And
if you ever feel like reaching out, if you ever
just want someone to chat to, we are all over
the internet.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
Yeah, you can find us Conspiracy Stuff on Twitter, Conspiracy
Stuff show on Instagram, Facebook, Conspiracy Stuff. You can find
us there. Join our Facebook group if you're interested in
you like the show, you want to talk to other
like minded people who can have just fantastic discussions. We've
been having a lot this past week with everyone there.
It's called Here's Where It Gets Crazy. That's our Facebook
(50:55):
group Find It and.
Speaker 4 (50:56):
All you have to do to be a member is
name the three hosts of the show, and occasionally our
amazing moderators will send us screenshots of some really funny ones.
And here's here's the latest. So who are the hosts
of the podcast? Stuff they don't want you to know? Answer?
Benjamin Bowtie bowling for soup, bowling matteas Fred Trump was
the Lizard King Frederick Noel take me down to Funky
(51:17):
Town Brown.
Speaker 2 (51:18):
Wow, that's great.
Speaker 4 (51:20):
Who was a guy named Tristan?
Speaker 2 (51:22):
Tristan McNeill, No different Tristan?
Speaker 1 (51:24):
Okay, Yeah, I mean that's true, isn't it? Like Noel Matt. Honestly,
if we think an answer is funny enough the Mouds.
While you're listening, I apologize, Cat Zach Sam Coop. If
if we think there's something funny enough that we'll probably
let it in.
Speaker 2 (51:43):
Yeah, that's definitely my policy.
Speaker 1 (51:46):
And while we're on the while we're on the feel
good train here, we would like to give a big
shout out to our youngest fan, I believe Eliza and Ray,
who was born to Nicholas Ray and his wife just
a few days ago as we record this. Wow, and
so congratulations Ray family. You asked us for a shout out.
(52:08):
And remember you promised the one day you would play
this episode for your kid.
Speaker 2 (52:15):
Yeah, the whole Gary web story. Why do I have
to do that?
Speaker 1 (52:18):
Why did I play?
Speaker 2 (52:19):
No?
Speaker 1 (52:20):
Yeah, just player the end. Just wait until she's wait
until she's an adult or if people still listen to
podcast at that time, then no. I mean, we're finne
with you. You don't have to absolutely, absolutely do not
feel obligated to play this for but we just wanted
to say congratulations.
Speaker 2 (52:36):
Absolutely, and that's the end of this classic episode. If
you have any thoughts or questions about this episode, you
can get into contact with us in a number of
different ways. One of the best is to give us
a call. Our number is one eight three three std WYTK.
If you don't want to do that, you can send
us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 1 (52:57):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (53:01):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Welcome back to the classics. Fellow conspiracy realist. If you
are a longtime listener, there is a name that you
know and know very well. No, not Intern Steve, although
shout out to him. Instead, we're talking about Gary Webb.
Who is Gary Webb? Or who was he?
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Yeah? How is he connected to Freeway? What is it Rick?
Not the Rick Ross rapper, but Freeway Rick Ross?
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Yeah, the guy who was actually moving lots and lots
of drugs allegedly according to his story for the government.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Yeah. Gary Webb's an investigative journalist who for a long
time worked for an outfit called the Mercury News. And
he is the guy who brought to the American public
the idea that the CIA was fueling the crack cocaine
epidemic in the United States. Ultimately, Gary Webb died from
(00:57):
two gunshots to the heads.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Deemed a suicide, well officially, but come on now, well
this feels weird to me. Let's look into it. By
the way, when every time I see the phrase Dark Alliance,
thankfully now I have this association to Gary Webb. But
it was a Balder's Gate video game that came out
(01:20):
a long time ago. That's right, called Balder's Gate Dark Alliance.
So then I imagined an isometric action adventure RPG. But
thankfully again Gary Webb is here to help us.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
Now I'm imagining both of them. What is Dark Alliance
really trying to tell us?
Speaker 3 (01:38):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies, history is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Hey, guys, I love the podcast and I'm usually a
huge fan of your work, but I have to say
I just listened to the Cryptids of Australia episode and
I was very disappointed. At the beginning you mentioned that
you did the Cryptid math. I can't believe no one
took this opportunity to say you did the monster math.
I expect better.
Speaker 4 (02:21):
That wasn't dad joke, missed opportunity.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
That was from Devin.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
My name's Matt, my name's Nol.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
They call me Ben. We are joined with our super
producer Paul Decktt. Most importantly, you are you. You are
here that makes this stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Matt.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
That was new was that you're trying something out, just
messing around.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
It's like a cold open kind of in a weird way,
unrelated entirely.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Just you know, calling us out for not doing the
monster math. It's cool.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Well, also calling us out for maybe not doing our
due diligence, which is something that's going to come up
a lot in this episode in particular. Right, you can
say all sorts of things, but can you prove them?
I don't know. Maybe let's start this way. So the
four of us live and record in the Atlanta area,
and Atlanta, in a huge burst of good news, has
(03:11):
a tremendous drug problem. Yeah, Like, as we're recording and
be sarcastic, but as we're recording this, not more than
three or four hundred yards away from the studio we're
in right now, there is more than likely someone on
a backstreet doing a hard drug of some sort, and
maybe on a main street. There are also probably several
(03:32):
people on street corners in the same vicinity selling these drugs.
And if you live in a large American city, areas
of your local metropolis almost definitely have areas where drug
problems are endemic and there are huge issues with trying
to address it. But here's the big question, where does
(03:54):
all of this come from? You know what I mean,
The local corner drug dealer is almost certainly not flying
to the Golden Triangle or flying to South America on
a weekly basis to sell somebody like heroin or cocaine
at ten bucks a pop. It's just the plane tickets
too expensive. It economically doesn't make sense.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Yeah, and that person or group of people selling drugs
on the corner aren't also on those flights purchasing the
large quantities of cocaine or whatever, then flying all of
that stuff back to the United States, then processing it
into let's say, crack cocaine, which is a process, and
then like you said, selling it for that low amount
(04:35):
of money.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Right. And there's an excellent study that Freakonomics did a
while back. We're big fans of Freakonomics that busted the
myth the drug dealers make tons and tons of cash.
Actually you would be. You might be incredibly surprised by
how little drug dealers, most drug dealers actually make.
Speaker 4 (04:55):
It kind of reminds me of that thing we talked
about ben off Mic about how little money bank robbers
probably make. You know, it's this notion that they're just
cleaning it up, but in fact, banks don't keep that
much money on hand, and to make a decent living,
like even like a relatively decent living, you would have
to your success rate would have to be one hundred percent,
and you would have to, you know, do a certain
(05:15):
amount of heists every.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Year with a certain amount of people, a certain amount
of people.
Speaker 4 (05:19):
Not that it's related one to one, but you'd think
that drug dealers, you know, there's this cliche notion that
they're raking in the cash. But I'm interested in your stats, Ben, Oh.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Well, yeah, there's there's the article from La Times that
it's literally titled why drug dealers live with their moms,
and it goes into what you're talking about here, how
very little most of the people actually selling the drugs make.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Now I don't want to. I can toot my own
horn a little bit on the bank heist thing too,
which I think they are related, mainly because I wrote
the video, but I think someone else appeared in it.
We did a brain stuff video way back in the
day about why you shouldn't rob a bank and you
can find the bank stats there, but they're they're sobering
and somber, and we see the same thing with drug dealers.
(06:05):
There's a quick excerpt we could read here the top
one hundred and twenty men on the Black Disciples pyramid.
That's the hierarchy of the gang. Right, we're paid very well,
but the pyramid they sat at top was gigantic. So
if you use this franchise from a guy named JT.
They mentioned earlier in the article, the franchise had three
officers and fifty foot soldiers. There were about five three
(06:29):
hundred people working for those one hundred and twenty bosses
at the top of the pyramid. And then there were
twenty thousand unpaid rank and file members, most of them
who were just vuying to become a foot soldier. And
how well did that foot soldier dream job pay when just.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Foot soldier job that these twenty thousand people.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Want, right, three dollars and thirty cents an hour, but
you don't have to pay taxes.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
And again this is written in two thousand and five,
and this is I believe that's when they were out
actually speaking with these people.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Mm hmm.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, So two thousand and five dollars.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
So clearly not enough for regular international travel. Where does
this stuff actually come from? How does cocaine enter the US?
How does heroin into the US and on and on
with these other drugs, especially when Uncle Sam ostensibly spends
(07:28):
billions and billions of dollars just trying to stop the
drug trade. How does it get here? One person thought
he found the answer, and he was an investigative journalist
named Gary Webb.
Speaker 5 (07:40):
So.
Speaker 4 (07:40):
Gary Webb was born on August thirty first, nineteen fifty five,
in Corona, California, and he wanted to be a writer
from a very early age, where for the student newspaper
at his college in Indianapolis. He ended up getting married
to him and named Susan Bell, and they went on
to have three kids together. And he first started getting
into investigative reporting when a piece appeared in the Kentucky
(08:03):
Post in nineteen eighty called The Coal Connection. It was
a massive series, a seventeen part series that he collabed
on with a guy named Thomas Sheffey that looked at
ben you might know more about this the conspiracy surrounding
a coal company. So he was already kind of early
on into whistleblowing and kind of like this sort of
deep dive truth telling, trying to expose the ills of society.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
Right right, similar to that wonderful journalist we interviewed a
while back, Mark Periskia I believe his name was correct, Yeah,
who did some fantastic work on the US government's arrangements
with spies in the era of civil rights. This guy
was a small town reporter who was breaking big stories,
(08:50):
and that.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Was a big deal, specifically about the assassination or the
murder of a president of this coal company, and how
this guy perhaps had some or he did have ties
to organized crime. Like that's no small thing. You don't
write about that and then not worry about writing about that.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
And as our friend Mark established earlier, the thing about
being an investigative journalist that's worth your salt is that
so much of the actual work is just verifying and
triple checking every single syllable of every single sentence that
is fit to print, and you have to do it
(09:32):
before it goes out to the masses. It turned out
that Gary Webb seemed to have a gift for this,
and that was just the beginning. His major work, the
one that most of us listening and probably familiar with,
is something called The Dark Alliance, And over the years,
several people have kind of muddied the water of his
(09:53):
research and what he actually claimed. So it's very important
for us to look at what he did do and
then also look at what he did not do precisely.
So here's here's the gist. In nineteen ninety six, Gary
Webb writes a series of three articles for The Mercury News,
which I believe was out in San Jose, San Jose.
So in these these three articles are pretty lengthy, and
(10:17):
later they're all collected into a book named The Dark Alliance.
This it's difficult to explain how much of an impact
this made, so let's just go with what he says.
In this series of articles. Gary Webb alleges and claims
that Nicaraguan contras are responsible for the Los Angeles crack
(10:38):
cocaine epidemic of the nineteen eighties.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
It's a bold claim.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Well, yeah and yeah, that they're responsible, but they're a
bunch of other hands.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Involved too, right, They're not working alone. He claims that
the US's Central Intelligence Agency, your CIA, knew this was
going on, knew there was an active and elaborate and
very very robe bust drug trafficking network there, and at
the very least, he says, the CIA ignored it. At worst,
he says they may have helped them actively covered up
(11:11):
the crimes, met with the drug.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Lords, provided transportation.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Provided transportation. Shout out to what Air America, that's the one.
So these allegations were pretty harsh, as you said, a
bold claim, But the thing is they weren't far fetched.
In South and Central America, it's not unusual for these
separatist or revolutionary groups to turn to the drug trade
(11:36):
as a way to raise some cash. Other groups have
done it too, like FARC or the Shining Path and
actually met FARK representatives who were very much against that process.
So all goes back to documentation, right, Gary Webb builds
this case and he argues, somehow, as opposed to all
(11:57):
the other drug running operations on that continent, somehow the
contras are able to get cocaine into the US and
then most importantly get cash out with a lot less
of a hassle than other cartels or drug runners.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Well, yeah, so they're saving a ton of money somehow
in this whole process, in the transportation, right hm. And
what that's allowing them to do, and this is where
it gets really bad for people who live in the
United States. This allows these groups to sell their product
at a much much lower price than their competitors.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Right, so you can't. It's like what a mom and
pop store is trying to compete with a huge, big
box chain grocery store. They have the economy of scale
that allows them to sell an apple for fifty cents,
whereas the mom and pop stores to sell it for
a dollar.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
And why would you buy your apple for a dollar
when you know you can get it for fifty cents.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
Maybe it's some more delicious apple.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
It's the exact same apple, my friend.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
I don't know. Maybe if you pay more for it,
it tastes better.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
There's a study with wine that absolutely proves that, Yeah,
that is true, calling out all samall yea's we'll go
ahead and maybe publish that study on wine on Here's
where it gets crazy later.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
But what if you're addicted to apples? Like, addicted to apples?
Are you still going to pay a dollar?
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Well?
Speaker 4 (13:21):
I don't know, I mean it depends right, Like are
you a connoisseur.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Of apples or are you just eating like any old
crab apple to scratch that unscratchable itch.
Speaker 4 (13:29):
Yeah, there's different layers, there's different there's a hierarchy of addiction.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Right, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say
the crack epidemic probably was going more towards.
Speaker 4 (13:40):
The crab apples.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
Yeah yeah, crack apples also just an unnecessary point here.
I feel like red Delicious Apple is like a terribly
ironic name because those are terrible apples.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
I don't like them either.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
They're kind of mushy. Yeah, you know, I don't get it.
Fuji apples all day.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
For me, it's Granny Smith.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Andy Smith. I would not have figured you for a
fan of tartness.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
It's my favorite.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
What about that? Mean, man, it's a it's a tart apple.
Speaker 4 (14:07):
No, I know, but why would you? Why would you
not think that Matt was a fan of tartness.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Because Matt's Matt's palette runs more toward spicy. He's exploring extremes.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
That's exactly what it is.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
Interesting.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
My favorite tart is a Carl tart.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Though it's well done, well done, but uh but the
character the argument still stays the same, right, Like he says,
obviously this, obviously someone is influencing the game that the
(14:43):
cartels are playing down there, and I have he says
proof that the CIA is either again either ignoring it,
maybe helping it, has met with cartel leaders and so on.
But what before we get too far, let's ask her
ourselves what he actually did not do After a word
(15:04):
from our sponsors.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
And we're back. So, the one thing that Gary Webb
did not do by discussing these things in his three
part series that would become The Dark Alliance, what he
didn't do is break this story. He wasn't the first
person to talk about America's crack coming from other places,
perhaps the contras, like specifically the Nicaraguan Contras, with perhaps
(15:34):
the CIA's approval. This was something that had already been
kind of floating around. It was a theory in a way.
He was just backing up these beliefs with some facts,
or at least with as close to facts as he could.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Get, kind of fleshing out the picture.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Right, Yeah, he's given you the details. He's zooming in
with the camera a little bit.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
There we go. I like that he never claimed to
have evidence that the CIA engineered the entire thing correct,
only that they knew something was going on, they tacitly
approved of it, and that they met with contra leaders
and funders to talk about the money.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
Yeah, the fact of the matter is that there were
a lot of kind of wild theories that shot off
from this reporting. And I know we'll get into some
of this little bit more, but Web was sort of
discredited and then sort of indicated, and he's been a
very divisive figure in terms of like how rigorous his
fact checking was for some of this stuff. There's a
(16:32):
piece an op ed in the Washington Post by they
named Jeff Lean from twenty fourteen, who was their assistant
managing editor, and he basically you should read it for yourself.
It's very interesting, but he kind of goes through in
shreds Web in terms of his abilities as a investigative
reporter and said that he makes all of these incredible
claims and that in order to make incredible claims like that,
(16:55):
as a journalist, you have to have incredible evidence, right,
and he doesn't exist well.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
And then also what role do the editors play in that.
I'm glad you mentioned twenty fourteen because that's an important year.
But let's let's get to the reaction of the initial
publication too. So the media does conflate what Web is saying,
as as we mentioned, they say that Web is saying
the CIA did it. Did it all smoking gun caught
(17:22):
red handed. It was the CIA with the crack cocaine
in the living room.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
As though they invented the substance for some nefarious purpose,
to try to manipulate in the population into behaving a
certain way, or to incarcerate black men unfairly.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Right, the biggest thing is that they were saying that
Web was saying. The news is saying that Web is
saying that the CIA is literally the drug dealer, which
he did not. He did not say that. I totally
get that.
Speaker 4 (17:51):
I mean, it's and you know, it's kind of what
we're experiencing now with the quick turnaround of like internet reporting,
where it's very easy to conflate something in a properly
research story and turn it into something else for your
own purposes. Wouldn't have thought that would have been happening
quite to this degree back then, But yet here we are.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
This is back when the news was all made by
like organic meatbags called humans rather than bots and botnets,
you know what I.
Speaker 6 (18:17):
Mean, and the day but then the days before deep fakes,
which is a scary thing, right, Yes, so you're absolutely right, guys.
He he did get conflated.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Now.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Well, and there's a whole other thing we're gonna talk
about in there about Gary web sources, right, and the
people he was talking to that he couldn't actually cite
as being the source.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Because they were so off the record. And then also
on a related thing that we have to get to
maybe in a future episode, it's pretty easy to prove
that on some level, the federal government, through multiple agencies,
has been targeting the black community for a long time.
I mean, the same amount of cocaine and the same
(19:02):
amount of crack cocaine carry wildly different minimum mandatory incarceration terms, right,
Why would that.
Speaker 4 (19:11):
Be Hmmm, Matt's making sort of a smushed up face
right now.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It's very Hollywood. That's your Charlie Day in front of
the conspiracy law chain smoking accusation. I mean, it's a
good question though, and the reaction is immense. This is
actually one of the first national security stories to really
(19:39):
blow up online to get people in the normal mainstream
America intensely interested. It's twenty thousand words long. It enrages
black communities who are wondering, why are these epidemics happening?
Why does it seem like there's more government punishment or
(20:00):
harassment of the community rather than government assistance of a
community in trouble. And then there are congressional investigations excuse me,
congressional hearings.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Yeah, congressional hearings. But some of the biggest, at least
most widely seen hearings or seen on television occur just
within smaller communities within LA and other cities like that,
where there are people filling a room, a huge room,
and they are just asking people how long have you
(20:31):
known about the CIA dealing drugs? Like did you know
that CIA was dealing drugs? And they're asking their city officials,
and they're asking big names who are supposed to be
in charge of things.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
And again, Webb is in his you can see interviews
with him as well, where he essentially says that he
doesn't think the CIA was like wringing its hands Monty
Burn's style and saying, oh you know what I mean. Yeah,
He says, instead, they just really wanted money, and they
(21:02):
wanted off the books money anyway, Like if it hadn't
been this, it would have been something else.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
They couldn't officially use the government's money to pay for
what they were trying to do.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
Because that's back when that kind of policy or law
actually stopped people from doing that sort of thing.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Have we talked much about what the Contra affair was
and why they were interacting with these militants who were
like they were kind of like rogue militants. Basically, what
was the benefit there?
Speaker 1 (21:31):
Mentioned in a previous episode, But I think you're right,
we should go ahead and just just give you the
quick and dirty.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
Right.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
It's also called Iran Gate, which is interesting, but here
in the US we usually call it.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
The Iran Contra affair at the Thomas Crown affair.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
Yeah, So essentially, what are the contras.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Men, Well, they were a group in Nicaragua and their
whole point, or at least for the United States purposes,
they were going to at least attempt to throw the
Sandinista government.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
Which were socialist exactly. These are right wing rebel groups.
So the US government tends to support right wing insurgents
much more often than say left wing or anti capitalist insurgents. Basically,
people are pro resource extraction tend to historically, I'm not
(22:23):
saying now, but tend to historically get more support from
the US government.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Yeah, and it's one of those things if everyone, if
everyone in a country is getting to kind of share
the wealth in a more you know, sometimes communists, sometimes
socialists structures that occurs where everyone gets a little peace.
It's not so great when you could just control it
from top.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
Down, oh man. Of course, the top down approach.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Of course, the infamous top down. So that sounds weird
when you see it that way. Yeah, sorry, miss top down,
But all right. So the Iran contra affair occurs when
the National Security Council of the US gets involved in
secret weapon transactions and other activities that are prohibited by Congress.
So Ronald Reagan, the Reagan administration, that's probably a better
(23:14):
way to say it. The Reagan administration at the time
is very concerned that communism will spread throughout Central America
and challenge the capitalists or liberal hierarchy, that is, you know,
challenge the hegemonic status. So the people of Nicaragua were
particularly the Satinista Liberation movement they mentioned earlier in nineteen
(23:38):
seventy nine, they overthrow the president who is actually a dictator.
And now the Reagan administration is having there come to
Jesus moment, as they would say in the South. So
he thought this would eventually threaten the security of the
United States. Remember we're still in the Cold War era
at this time, and so the Reagan administration pushed huge
(23:59):
amount of some military aid into not just Nicaragua, but
other governments and other places that have civil wars and
gorilla fighting in hopes of preventing a left wing government.
And in the case of Nicaragua, they wanted to destabilize
that government and engineer and overthrow. So why is Iran
(24:21):
in there, right?
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Iran? I don't understand.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
So they sold anti tank and anti aircraft missiles to Iran,
believing that if they sold the missiles to Iran, Iran,
through its PROXYHBLAH, would allow hostages in Lebanon to be released.
This is already very rupe. Goldberg sat so much, and
so a portion of the money that Iran paid for
(24:46):
was diverted and then given to the contrast. A lot
of this occurred under the supervision of a man who's
very familiar to everyone, Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North.
Speaker 2 (24:58):
You may remember him from that famous hearing. Yeah it
wasn't a hearing. I don't even know exactly what it was,
but you can see video of him just admitting to
this stuff.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
And feels like he did the right thing to stop
the the ultimate war of ideology between the West and
the communist countries. So the problem with this stuff is
that while they're raising this money for the Contras, they're
violating something called the Bowland Amendment BOLA and D, a
(25:28):
law that was passed in nineteen eighty four that banned
direct or indirect military aid to the contrast. So they're
moving money in a sleazy way, yep, but they think
they're doing the right thing.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
It's just a different kind of shell game.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
It's kind of like, Yeah, it's kind of like the
idea that the ends justify the means, or that there
is a difference between what is legal and what is
morally correct, and they felt like they were doing the
moral thing. Okay, so that's around. Does that?
Speaker 4 (25:56):
Yeah, man, Yeah it does. And I knew some of
that but not all of that. But it sounds to
me like the accusation here is that they would go
to any means necessary to prop up this militant group
that was potentially going to do good for our government
in deposing this kind of pesky regime that was in
place that was inconvenient regime, right, absolutely, and that would
(26:19):
extend as far as Web's concern to funneling drugs in
the United States knowingly in order to funnel some of
that money into this cause that needed to be off
books money, right, great.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Black budget stuff. Yeah, And so this accusation lights a
flame under the American public and in a strange, not unprecedented,
let's call it that not unprecedented show of solidarity. Various
papers of note excoriate Web, the Washington Post before twenty fourteen,
(26:54):
Like back when this was released, the Washington Post is saying,
there are huge problems with the reporting, there's huge errors.
Why can't you cite who said that? Why can't you
prove this claim that you're making? And then Web would
go back and say, why I didn't make that claim?
But he can't compete with New York Times.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
And in turn, Jerry sepos chepos I believe, who was
the executive editor of The Mercury News, the paper that
this piece was, the series of pieces were published in
kind of threw Web under the bus, and he said, quote,
we oversimplified the complex issue of how the crack epidemic
in America grew through imprecise language and graphics because there
are a lot of infographics in this piece as well,
(27:32):
we created impressions that were open to misinterpretation. And that's
the kicker, because it was that misinterpretation. Maybe Web didn't
go quite as far as as some people might think
if you actually read the work. But there's some quotes
in here I I want to throw out too, to
see what you guys think. But it was those other
more quick to jump on a hot story, news outlets
(27:53):
that kind of really just kind of made stuff up
from whole cloth.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Right, you can't defend yourself against the claim that you
did not make other than saying you did not make that.
And if you don't have a large enough microphone or platform,
you're just not going to get your rebuttal out there.
I mean, rebuttals and corrections are some of the most
seldom read parts of any newspaper, and this a lot
(28:18):
most of this is occurring in newspapers at the time.
Although Web was prescient enough to put his work online
real quick.
Speaker 4 (28:25):
He made a website. He did the surrounds these pieces
like early On, which was which is not as much
of a thing back then.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
Right, it was very as I say, he's very much
an early adopter, and the communities that needed to find
out about this, he actually drove a lot of them online.
People who ordinarily wouldn't have cared about this found it
as a safe way to arrive at information they felt
the government was trying to hide. It turns out. I
want to go just quick to back to twenty fourteen,
(28:54):
where the Washing Post republished or they published another criticism,
which I I think is the op ed you're going
to read from NOL. The CIA at the same year,
on September eighteenth, released a ton of documents spanning thirty years,
three decades, and a lot of it confirmed confirmed stuff
(29:15):
Gary Webb had argued. They show at least that there
was collusion to in backstage, smoky room style collusion to
try to suppress the story. One of the things that
was released.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
This is in twenty fourteen.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
M One of the things that was released was an
article that was six pages long titled Managing a Nightmare,
CIA Public Affairs and the Drug Conspiracy Story. So this
you can find this online. This looks at how the
CIA reacted to what it saw as a huge public
relations crisis or catastrophe and then showing that the agency
(29:55):
actually didn't have to do much to extinguish the public
outcry press the story, because you see, as we said,
as I said, there are moments of not unprecedented solidarity
among papers of note, at least here in the US,
probably in your country as well. Sometimes that happen, not
all the time, but sometimes that happens because they have
(30:16):
a relationship behind the scenes that you as the public,
will never see with intelligence agencies in that country. So
the CIA essentially contacts their higher ups in the world
of media and publishing and they say, look, let's all
vultroun up together.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
On get on the same page everybody.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Like in jfk Assassination.
Speaker 4 (30:39):
Can I read a quote from yeah, web Pieces.
Speaker 2 (30:41):
Before you do that? Just noting in that same year,
twenty fourteen, that's when the Jeremy Renner movie Kill the
Messenger comes out. That's right, that's all about the Gary Webster.
Speaker 4 (30:50):
Do you guys see that. Yes, I hadn't even heard
of it. Oh, it's is again.
Speaker 2 (30:54):
I really liked it, but only because we had done
a video on it in the past. I knew the story.
Speaker 4 (30:58):
We're getting a lot of push I mean, it's I really.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Enjoyed it had a built in audience.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Yeah, fair enough.
Speaker 4 (31:07):
I just want to play out a couple of these
some of these claims that I think are interesting when
you read them. In one place from Gary Webb's Dark
Alliance trilogy of articles that ultimately became a book. Quote,
thousands of young black men are serving long prison sentences
for selling cocaine, a drug that was virtually unobtainable in
black neighborhoods before members of the CIA's army started bringing
(31:28):
it into South Central in the nineteen eighties at bargain
basement prices. So, I mean, it is hyperbolic as hell.
And the guy who wrote this op ed. The guy
was talking about earlier, the twenty fourteen anyway, Jeff Leen,
who was the assistant managing editor for The Washington Post.
He calls that a nut graph, which I had never
heard of. And I love this. And this is how
(31:50):
he sums that up. What a nut graph is. He says,
this was one of the most difficult things for a
reporter to write, because you have to summarize some very
out landish, outrageous facts and synthesize you know, the truth
behind it, and somehow you know paint in the often
(32:11):
contradicting notions behind it.
Speaker 1 (32:14):
It's kind of like writing a blurb before the story's
telling the audience why should I read this exactly?
Speaker 4 (32:20):
But it's also you know, he says, this is kind
of where web went off the rails and went a
little too far, and he ultimately resigned from his position
and was never hired again by any mainstream newspapers of
note rights. And he just kind of went rogue and
did his own thing. But he already kind of set
the tone for doing that by making that website. Now
(32:41):
he had this book, and he obviously had people that
believed him and probably had a following outside of the
mainstream press.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
Yeah, and also, you know, if the Internet had been
more prominent at the time, things might have gone differently
for him. He was also notoriously stubborn and at times
difficult to work with. He started blaming his editors pretty quickly,
so things became acrimonious between the Mercury editors and himself,
but it did lead directly to a Senate subcommittee hearing
(33:13):
where John Kerry was a senator at the time, investigated
the AP's findings from the Associated Press, and they released
in nineteen eighty nine, a report that was more than
one thousand pages. It said it found quote considerable evidence
that the Contras were linked to running drugs and guns
and the US government knew about it. So that would
(33:33):
mean that on that base level, some of what Web
is saying is true. But the way that he's using
these very highly dramatic phrases like calling the Contras the
CIA's army, you know what I mean, that's that for
a lot of investigators, that makes it tougher to believe
(33:55):
these other claims. So you're probably wondering why we're speaking
about Gary Web in the past tense. And I know
we're jumping around a lot right now. I guarantee you
that previously we had a nice little timeline for painting
the story. We've got a picture here. We're talking about
Gary Webb in past tense because after all this stuff
is occurring, he is largely considered to have failed his profession.
(34:18):
He's essentially blacklisted from any job that he would want,
and he's dire need of money. His characters being attacked
and stuff. On December tenth of two thousand and four,
he was found dead with two thirty eight caliber gunshot
wounds to his head in his home in Carmichael, California,
which he had just had to put on the market.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
Because he couldn't afford the mortgage.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
Right, because he couldn't afford the mortgage. Now, the coroner
ruled that this death was a suicide. And Webb's ex wife,
remember we noted her earlier, Susan Bell, She said that
he had been very depressed after a falling out with
his former employers at the Mercury, and a lot of
people believe that being professionally discredited drove him to suicide
(35:01):
and that his claims in the Dark Alliance were at
the very least exaggerated, if not made up. So the
question is, you know what happened. Did he break ethical boundaries?
Did he false fi information in order to sell a
juicy story, could he not prove his claims his professional
failure lead him to take his own life? Or is
there more to the story.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
And we're going to talk about that right after a
quick word from our sponsor.
Speaker 1 (35:32):
Here's where it gets crazy, Olhthough not really, because.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
We kind of jumped ahead. It's okay, it's okay.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
But so Gary Webb was right, he was correct, at
least partially but probably but probably not all the way correct, because,
as Lean says in that post op ed, you have
mentioned nol Gary Webb was no journalism hero. Despite what
kill the Messenger says, as Lean pointed out, there are
a lot of things that are hyper, a lot of
(36:00):
things he can't support. But we have to mention not
only was he at least partially right, but despite the
hooplah and the controversy and character assassination, everybody knew that
he was right beforehand because two other journalists had figured
this out in nineteen eighty five, more than a decade
before the Dark Alliance, journalists Robert Perry and Brian Barger
(36:24):
or Barker, found and proved that Contra groups were trafficking
cocaine to help finance their war in Nicaragua, which the
US also wanted to happen. And then after they came
out with that, the Reagan administration launched a behind the
scenes campaign to assassinate their character, remove their credibility as journalists.
(36:47):
And it was an attempt to discredit any reporting on
Contras and drugs. And there's an article by guy named
Peter Kornblow who was writing for the Columbia Journalism review
from nineteen ninety seven, who says whether the campaign was
the cause of this suppression or not. Coverage of the
story was minimal, but it did happen.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Proved and it's crazy to think about this now, But
on March fourth, nineteen eighty seven, the then President Reagan
came out after not speaking to the American people for
a long time during this whole Iran contra just scandal,
I guess, is what you would call it. He came out,
and he gave a speech, and let's just listen to
(37:31):
one tiny little piece of that.
Speaker 5 (37:33):
First, let me say I take full responsibility from my
own actions and for those of my administration. As angry
as I may be about activities undertaken without my knowledge,
I am still accountable for those activities. As disappointed as
I may be and some who served me, I am
still the one who must answer to the American people
(37:54):
for this behavior. And as personally distasteful as I find
secret bank accounts and to funds, and as the Navy
would say, this happened on my watch. Let's start with
the part that is the most controversial. A few months ago,
I told the American people I did not trade arms
for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell
(38:16):
me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell
me it is not.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
So this was a big deal in Americans' minds. People
knew about it. The President is going on television and saying, hey,
I didn't know this was happening. It was happening, but
I didn't know what was happening. Everybody's cool, Okay, we'll just.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
Move forward, like plausible deniability or genuinely sincerely saying this
occurred without my knowledge.
Speaker 2 (38:41):
Either way, he is already telling you in nineteen eighty seven,
this is happening, and.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
It's kind of It's interesting. I really appreciate you play
that clip because it's something that is somewhat plausible, because
if you are at that high level, if you're the president,
then a lot of things that you say are directives
that are well what sometimes in corporate jargon we refer
to as the forty thousand foot view. Yeah, it's like saying, well,
(39:08):
make sure that communism doesn't spread in South and Central America. Okay,
that sounds good, but you haven't. If you leave all
the details up to other people, you have no idea
what they're going to do. You have maybe a reasonable
expectation that they will obey the law, but other than that,
it's give me results.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
How badly does that person want to prove, like, do
what you want them to do and make themselves look
good in your eyes as the president? Because you just
you don't know where that line is for everybody. It's
different for everyone.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
And this leads to a question that I think a
lot of people are still debated. We said, we said
that his death was ruled as suicide, right, Yeah, we
know that. We know that he died from two gunshot
wounds to the head. A lot of people even today
believe that Gary Webb was actually murdered and then his
death was portrayed as a suicide to cover up further
(40:05):
research you might have published. I mean, what do you
guys think about that? Ever you've been reading.
Speaker 2 (40:09):
This, Yeah, there were a lot of rumors that he
was perhaps working on another piece, another story, something bigger.
Those are almost all rumors, almost all of them. And
then everything you hear from his wife, and specifically from
his wife at the time, just about the deep depression
that he was suffering from in those moments right before
(40:32):
he died. Hm, it does make you think perhaps this
was a suicide. It just points to it, right, But
let's just take a moment and put ourselves in his shoes.
Imagine that you're a journalist. You're being contacted by people
varying people of varying levels of involvement within the United
(40:53):
States government and or clandestine organizations. They are telling you
stories about things that have occurred. They're giving you specifics
about stuff that's already in the public domain. It's stuff
that's known, but they're giving you the full story. And
simultaneously they're telling you you cannot publish my name you.
No one can ever know that I'm talking to you.
(41:15):
This cannot happen. And you are publishing these stories out
because this is your big break. This is something that
feels very important. There are thousands and thousands of lives
being affected by what these people are telling you, right,
It is an important story to tell. The pressure that
Gary Webb was feeling and must have been feeling to
(41:37):
put those stories out that would become dark Alliance. I
cannot fathom what that must have felt like, but I
know for sure that it was heavy. It was a
heavy burden to bear for him, and it affected his
family life and it affected his mental health in some way.
Speaker 4 (41:53):
Are there any indications that he got death threats and things?
I mean, I would just assume so with being that
public and such a divisive anti government story.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
That's a good question depending on who you believe.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
Right if you watch the movie, is definitely portrayed a lot.
Speaker 1 (42:07):
But well also in the movie, in the film Killing
the Messengers, I heard it described in a review as
it's a retelling of the Gary Web story in a
place where everyone in a universe where everyone in the
world is wrong except for Gary Web.
Speaker 2 (42:23):
Everybody believes Gary. Yeah, exactly exactly where Gary Web is right.
But just from in I just I'm trying to identify
with him, maybe a little more than I should, But
I can imagine a place where being discredited after having
such strong feelings about it being real and being important,
(42:44):
would take a huge toll on not only your self
esteem and self worth, but your ability to continue on.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
And one thing that a lot of people see as
a smoking gun here is the fact that he died
from not one, but two yes shots to the head.
You might be surprised by how many people who attempt
that sort of process do end up giving themselves ultimately
a non fatal injury. But you know, it's never it's
(43:14):
never going to be pretty. But one of one of
the gunshots was through his cheek. Yeah, so they believe
that maybe he missed and then went for a second shot.
But because of that, because of the idea that two
gunshot wounds the head, seemed unusual to a lot of people,
(43:35):
the majority of whom are not forensic investigators. Obviously, there's
this huge outcry and local reporters end up going to
Sacramento County and they say, okay, what go on record,
tell us what is this? And the coroner at the time,
a guy named Robert Lyons, said, it is unusual. It
is a suicide. It's unusual in a suicide case to
(43:57):
have two shots, but it's been done in the past.
It's in fact a distinct possibility. So he's saying it's
definitely suicide. This has happened before, and that explanation is
not good enough for people who thought there was more
to the story, you know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yeah, Well, there are you can hear versions of this
story or read them online. Where he was attempting to leave,
he was trying to get away, he was trying to
sell his house. He was trying to leave and he
was cocked before he could leave by whatever in nefarious forces.
These claims have a zero evidence to back them up,
(44:34):
but it you know, it's tough for me to completely
discount them. But at the same time, it seems a
lot less plausible than the official story.
Speaker 1 (44:44):
So here's yeah, and here's another question, just to show
both sides here. If it was some sort of murder
and if it was related to his investigations in the
Dark Alliance, then why did they wait eight years after
the publication of the book for him to take him
(45:05):
out of the picture. The timeline is just strange.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
Yeah, the claims I've seen were that he was working
on something else outside of the Dark Alliance, which is
why it got him killed.
Speaker 1 (45:17):
And this argument in this discussion, this controversy continues in
the modern day in twenty eighteen, as we record this
in one of many of the American cities that still
battle drug problems. Where's it all coming from? Is someone
helping them out? Both sides of the argument. A lot
(45:39):
of prominent papers do continue to attack Gary Webb's claims,
or attack is a strong word, they take it apart
piece by piece and say it didn't prove this. This
is as you said earlier in old hyperbolic statement. And
on the other side of this, and these are great
valid points too, but on the other side, continuing releases
(46:01):
of government documents keep supporting aspects of what he has said.
Speaker 2 (46:07):
Yeah, small little pieces.
Speaker 1 (46:08):
So it's there's no two ways about it, no bones
about it. It's old beans to say it, but we
should admit the Dark Alliance does have several several prominent
errors that could be critical to you know, like a
critical wound to the argument in the book. But CIA
documents released from the agency at least confirmed chunks of it.
No one is arguing that the CIA showed often a
(46:32):
very strange disinterest in the drug trade. Yeah, but how
involved or not involved were they will future declassified documents
vindicate web from Beyond the Grave? Did the was the
murder something more indirect by ending his career? You know,
it's like, did the CIA commit the murder and it
(46:53):
was Gary Webb that pulled the trigger? M M it's
I mean, it's a different way you look at it.
Speaker 2 (46:58):
But well, something you think about because that strategy of
disinformation by giving a lot a lot of information to
someone where almost all of it is true but a
couple are not true, or almost all of it is untrue,
but a couple of things are true, right that, And
it makes you wonder if the way, especially if you
(47:21):
look at it with the large chunks of unsupported claims
that are in there, it makes you wonder if he's
speaking to one or two people out of the groups
of people, who is giving him incorrect information on purpose
in order to in the future discredit him, which, like
you said, Ben would then eventually lead to two gunshots
to the head self inflicted.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
What do you what do you think?
Speaker 4 (47:44):
It's very suspicious circumstances. I really, you know, it's like
cobaine level suspicious circumstances. You know, I don't know. I
don't care for it.
Speaker 1 (47:54):
It's definitely it definitely has something something off about it.
But the thing is as well, if you are the
central intelligence agency, wouldn't you have the wherewithal to make
a death look like an accident?
Speaker 2 (48:07):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (48:08):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (48:09):
Well maybe, And here's the other thing. If you're taken
out by let's say, portions of the narcotics world, so
higher ups in the drug you know, the drug I
don't want to call them companies. What do you call organizations? Sure,
these narcotics organizations. It's probably also not going to be
that clean of a murder.
Speaker 1 (48:30):
Perhaps there's that it could be maybe sending a message,
but it could have just been a suicide. I again,
going back to this, make it look like an accident thing.
It's a tragic truth that fatal car accidents happen multiple
times every single day in this country. Yeah, and in
most countries with dense populations and pedestrians and vehicles. So
(48:55):
I'm still undecided. I know that the official story says
that it was a suicide. His ex spouse said it
was a suicide. It is possible to shoot yourself twice
in the act of committing this, But don't I want
to Let's what do you think, fellow conspiracy realist, to
tell us, tell us your take on this.
Speaker 2 (49:17):
It just makes you Here's my plea to anyone listening
to this who wants to be an investigative journalist or
is an investigative journalist. If if you are working on
anything that becomes highly important ever in your life, please
whatever the circumstances are, No, it's never bad enough to
where you need to take your own life. Just know
(49:40):
that it's never going to get that dark. It cannot.
You are worth it, stick around and these kind of
claims won't have to be looked at in the future.
Speaker 4 (49:51):
And of course, I mean if you are feeling even
remotely in that way, there are people that can help.
I mean, there's the suicide Prevention Hotline, and you can
find a social worker or some kind of group where
you can talk to people that are going through similar
things than you. I mean, at the risk of sounding
cheesy and hyperbolic, I mean, you're never as alone as
you might think. And I say that as someone who's
(50:12):
dealt with suicide in my life and people with suicidal aviations,
and it's absolutely not the end all be all, even
if it feels that way.
Speaker 1 (50:21):
Well said, and I don't think that's hyperbolic or cheesy
at all. I think that was very well said. And
if you ever feel like reaching out, if you ever
just want someone to chat to, we are all over
the internet.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
Yeah, you can find us Conspiracy Stuff on Twitter, Conspiracy
Stuff show on Instagram, Facebook, Conspiracy Stuff. You can find
us there. Join our Facebook group if you're interested in
you like the show, you want to talk to other
like minded people who can have just fantastic discussions. We've
been having a lot this past week with everyone there.
It's called Here's Where It Gets Crazy. That's our Facebook
(50:55):
group Find It and.
Speaker 4 (50:56):
All you have to do to be a member is
name the three hosts of the show, and occasionally our
amazing moderators will send us screenshots of some really funny ones.
And here's here's the latest. So who are the hosts
of the podcast? Stuff they don't want you to know? Answer?
Benjamin Bowtie bowling for soup, bowling matteas Fred Trump was
the Lizard King Frederick Noel take me down to Funky
(51:17):
Town Brown.
Speaker 2 (51:18):
Wow, that's great.
Speaker 4 (51:20):
Who was a guy named Tristan?
Speaker 2 (51:22):
Tristan McNeill, No different Tristan?
Speaker 1 (51:24):
Okay, Yeah, I mean that's true, isn't it? Like Noel Matt. Honestly,
if we think an answer is funny enough the Mouds.
While you're listening, I apologize, Cat Zach Sam Coop. If
if we think there's something funny enough that we'll probably
let it in.
Speaker 2 (51:43):
Yeah, that's definitely my policy.
Speaker 1 (51:46):
And while we're on the while we're on the feel
good train here, we would like to give a big
shout out to our youngest fan, I believe Eliza and Ray,
who was born to Nicholas Ray and his wife just
a few days ago as we record this. Wow, and
so congratulations Ray family. You asked us for a shout out.
(52:08):
And remember you promised the one day you would play
this episode for your kid.
Speaker 2 (52:15):
Yeah, the whole Gary web story. Why do I have
to do that?
Speaker 1 (52:18):
Why did I play?
Speaker 2 (52:19):
No?
Speaker 1 (52:20):
Yeah, just player the end. Just wait until she's wait
until she's an adult or if people still listen to
podcast at that time, then no. I mean, we're finne
with you. You don't have to absolutely, absolutely do not
feel obligated to play this for but we just wanted
to say congratulations.
Speaker 2 (52:36):
Absolutely, and that's the end of this classic episode. If
you have any thoughts or questions about this episode, you
can get into contact with us in a number of
different ways. One of the best is to give us
a call. Our number is one eight three three std WYTK.
If you don't want to do that, you can send
us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 1 (52:57):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (53:01):
Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
1. The Podium
The Podium: An NBC Olympic and Paralympic podcast. Join us for insider coverage during the intense competition at the 2024 Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games. In the run-up to the Opening Ceremony, we’ll bring you deep into the stories and events that have you know and those you'll be hard-pressed to forget.
2. In The Village
In The Village will take you into the most exclusive areas of the 2024 Paris Olympic Games to explore the daily life of athletes, complete with all the funny, mundane and unexpected things you learn off the field of play. Join Elizabeth Beisel as she sits down with Olympians each day in Paris.
3. iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2024 Olympics.