Why the drug war is a legitimate war against terrorism

Post Reply New Topic

Why the drug war is a legitimate war against terrorism

1. Have you ever known of any major drug dealer on the news without weapons?

2. Have you known of no existence where drug dealers with guns will use the weapons they have to keep on dealing and stay out of jail?

3. Terrorism (criminality) comes in many forms, when highly illegal and threatening against law abiding citizens, containing networks socially of drug relations, and comprised of the intent of continuation and growth. IT is either worse than or nearly as bad as supernatural belief terrorisms. It’s more common and widespread.

4. Propagandist will have you believe its all just to relax, it’s his or her freedom to take extremely bad drugs and pay for it while deteriorating their lives to substances like cocaine.

5. Without educating the minds of the young and enforcing the laws, drug dealers and drug addicts might be further wide-spread. Resulting in a greater burden to public welfares and grave societal harms.

The War on Some People with Some Illegal Drugs and the War on Terror have the same aim: to increase police powers in a police state. As Orson Welles observed, "Only in a police state is a policeman's job easy." William S. Burroughs said, "Drug laws are a pretext to increase police powers." All you have to do is yell "Drugs!" or "Terrorist!" and you can take somebody down, take their assets and ruin their reputation. That is why the Bush administration represents the new McCarthyism. That is why films like Good Night and Good Luck are so important.
Bush's actions--and the actions of previous administrations--have created terrorist uprisings. The US gov't sold weapons to Saddam so he could fight Iraq. Then, when he became inconvenient, there was talk of "weapons of mass destruction" and "Saddam aligned with Al Qaida." Neither charge was ever proven. Osama could have been captured many times--esp. when he was in Paris in 2004 for kidney dialysis. The CIA chief in Paris went to see him. This is documented on Mike Ruppert's website (http://www.fromthewilderness.com)
Of course terrorists sell drugs. In a black market economy, it's a quick way to make big money for weapons. If drugs were legal, the opium growers would be getting about 10% of their current profits. The "drugs for weapons" trade is old news. Just ask the CIA. Better yet, ask Alfred McCoy, who wrote the book on that seedy subject. And how's the opium crop in Afghanistan selling these days?
Bush is using the oldest weapon in the world--fear of the stranger, the other--to justify wiretaps, the war in Iraq, detaining "enemy combatants" indefinitely without trial or access to legal counsel. True, some inhabitants of Camp X-Ray have been released, but how many remain?
In the February 6 issue of Newsweek, writers Daniel Klaidman, Stuart Taylor Jr. and Evan Thomas detail the "palace revolt" between Bush admin. officials who wanted broader definitions of torture and warrantless wiretaps and those officials who fought against unwarranted intrusions against civil liberties.
I'll say it again: the Wars on Terror and Some Illegal Drugs are being used to create a police state. That is their main objective. As long as the spectre of Osama is out there, Bush et.al. can use him and 9/11 as justification for tearing the Bill of Rights into shreds.

More conspircy hoopla..

off topic, not balanced and is just anti-government.

screw loose..

Start a Wire-Tapping thread, I'd be glad to talk about it intellectually. Come on, terrorism is terrorism, terrorism is cirminalism, however terrorism as a terminological archetype is vast. This topic is specific.

When there is an active market in anything and it is underground, there will be violence and criminatlity for two reasons.

First, because the trade is outlawed, the people in it are criminals by definition, and therefore end up classed with - and working with - the professionals in that area, thieves, murderers, etc. "These are lawless places with lawless people workign here; see? We were right to close them down." That's a quote from a fgantasy novel in which a city run by monks closed down the public baths.

Second, if you get stiffed in a drug deal or prostitution or anything, you cartainly can't take the defaulter to court. So you threaten them with violence. This works on civilians. Professional criminals are hardened to that and require ever-escalating measures. This was true when the commodity was liquor (how many gangland shootings over whiskey distribution have you seen since 1933? Precious few). It would be true if the commodity were cigarettes or soda pop.

But - conspiracy theory or not, drugs are even easier to plant on a suspect than weapons, and cops have been known to do so either to cover their backs in a shooting gone wrong, or as a way of taking down someone they are certain is guilty but can't make a case against. That latter is only human nature.

Just my $0.02

My post was based on fact. I gave sources. Therefore, your comments are pejorative and not germane.

I was totally on-topic as to giving reasons why it appears that the war on terror and the war on drugs are connected.

I deal with facts, not "hoopla."

Notice what kind of trolls get into these discussions and how they act.

Is that comment directed at me?

If so, I'd like to know what is troll-like about my behavior. My actions have been to the point and factual. Clarify. please.

I do not believe in trolling. To me trolling policy is not allowing free expression becuase the term is over used. So I use it only sometimes.

People are very political minded, yet illogical.

You bring up to many topics making it the same one. You have a case against the current goverment, not the war on drugs.

I'll be back soon to talk about the war on drugs.

Someone's been walking on MY bridge!

This is mixing about as well as oil and water.

The war on terror is presently pitting two divergent theocratic entities against each other, using socio-economic contrasts and fallacious premisies to further polarize the two sides (tactics used by both sides).

The drug war, on the other hand, is driven by simple economics within a black market system which is patently aided and abetted by the very entities charged with reducing drug use in the United States. The goal is not to curtail substance abuse, but to continue to perpetuate a money making industry, by keeping law enforcement employed and prisons filled so that more can be constructed.

While narco-terrorism does exist, it is centered around habit forming stimulants and opium derived narcotics and not so much around psychotropics and entheogenic substances.

Until we are able to differentiate, the goverments' position does not hold water. Look at all the damage done by cocaine, heroin, alcohol and tobacco--all exceedingly addictive substances.
Yet, a significant number of America's prison population is doing time for cannabis, which does not have nearly the close-relationship with firearms and violence as "sc's" initial argument would imply.

Until we can legislate with brains rather than hysteria, we will continue to be bogged in the quagmire of an artificial economy fueled by incarcerating end users of mind altering substances rather than modifying their behavior towards being more productive and valued members of society.

Makes sense..

I do not always type how I think, I use differing points to create conversation, usually from what little I get of the radio or T.V (like creating your own commercial). Then the hope is to intelectualize about it. I am busy today though and WILL be back tonight.

That's cool.

Your actions have indeed been to the point and factual. I was talking about someone who brought in the issues of terrorism and the drug war, said that the drug war was a "legitimate response" to terrorism, then told you that you were off-topic for responding to the issues that he raised. That is pretty common troll-type behavior.

No you put words in my mouth.. Get the facts of what I said correctly, you are trolling my post by calling my post a troll act.

This topic is about the war on drugs, no trolls and not terrorism absent of drug law. Don't mix the two.. In part the war on terrorism is the drug war because of trafficking from other countries and finding of KNOWN weapons used against its citizens.

Going up against that fact and against the law to me is the same as supporting the terrorist that are drug dealers.

I have not commented strategically and for a purpose concerning those who use drugs directly in specifics, rather dealers and sellers.

To have a proper conversation with me, usually folks have to think outside of the brainwashing they experience from other propagandists and seek the facts.

How fun.

P.S I believe there is case law concerning calling someone else a troll, despite it's non-intellectuality, it is indeed slander when improper used. Yet slander law is complicated and I have my own opinions.

1. Political slander by my interpretations of the law is void, nothing like it exists.

2. For business and the private citizen it does, I’m not a politician.

When mistakes are made people discuss them like now, I have explained myself, let us not delve into the paths of social destructions for known political differences, of which we both can intellectually and maturely discuss for a genuine understanding of one another and perhaps the genuine pursuits of reasoning’s.

I'll be back in 4 hours, I dont really want to return to nonsense, come on. Talk don't cuase disruption and stay on topic, its really good free conversation.

Well if your talking about Glaxo-Smith Clyne they probably have a breed of super killer monkeys in their secret medical research labs so i guess so