Why the drug war is a legitimate war against terrorism

Post Reply New Topic

Doesnt that tell you as much about the 'news' as it does about drug dealers?
(or rather, those dealers that are deemed news-worthy)



We have extremely strict gun control in this neck of the woods, even our armed robbers use fake weapons



I cant make grammatical sense of this. It seems your conflating two completely seperate issues?



Cocaine taken habitually and in large amounts can kill you, like alcohol or tobacco. Heroin, if used in a controlled way is not physically dangerous. Entheogenics can be overwhelmingly positive and have helped change many lives for the better. A single dose of Ibogaine is said to cure 80% of heroin addicts.




Drug 'education' usually means anti-drug brainwashing. Genuine, balanced education should be encouraged, but that has nothing to do with a drug 'war'.

Apart from your 3rd point which i didnt understand, i cant see how any of this relates to terrorism.

People tell me all the time they do not understand what I am saying, it is an excuse.



Ok I will take breaks between what I am doing.

It seems there are a few people who are purposely not seeing the point.

Look, where there are illegal drugs there have been known instances of weapons and other criminal behavior. Terrorism I'd like to compare to the terminology criminalism. I did it for a point as it is my belief if you look at my questions which were meant to be picked apart obviously. Terrorism itself is reacted to with what I have discussed in the past with others as hypochondrias.

I'm talking about the societal (sociological) effects of illegal drugs, the more comparisons you make to non-illegal the more it seems your trying to justify the acceptance of illegal drugs, to me. The reality is true where illegal drugs exist where weapons and gangs do, domestic terrorism, not a single act of crime rather organized, same as international terrorism just a label.

Drugs is how gangs like I saw in Fresno California fund illegal activities, harm its citizens and cause disorder literality and figuratively. They sell illegal products to people and people suffer, lives change for the worse buddy. Ending the distribution of illegal substances to those who do not have proper medical prescriptions is by all means the moral, ethical and wise things to do.

If your supporting the legalization of street drugs for open resale without doctors approval then you are doing them yourselves or are frankly ignorant to the causal realities of both the mechanism of gateway and the real and true lives of those who abuse drugs.

Who besides those who profit from, use themselves would disaprove of all possible measures to circumvent the further increase of degenerates in our nation? Those fearing wire-tapping for civil liberty reasons are perhaps (possible) paranoid delusional. Such psychological tendencies especially facts concerning 9/11 behaviorally especially with elected officials proves humans to be quite frankly disturbed.

I know now why certain folks are meant to lead; they just have a better understanding of the human condition.

If people want to argue against wire-tapping criminals, you’re supporting the criminals. However I also believe a judge to be an advocate, judges need to be available 24hrs a day 7 days a week for our federal government to get approval through.

Drugs can also fund international terrorism….


[/b]

See, sc is simply labelling as criminals anyone the government decides to monitor. It used to be that a criminal suspect was innocent until proven guilty. Those who support the gathering of evidence by whatever means push this by labelling as criminals people who are legally considered to be innocent. That's doubletalk. He's also saying that people who don't trust the government when it behaves like this must be crazy. Jesus.

No you are taking my words incorrectly again. What I say is what I say your very anti-government yourself. Do not blindly trust anything in whole, but clearly anti-establish-mental thought styles are typical paranoid based.

Person speaking against the government are not delusional, I'd never say it. Just my experience in my highly in-depth study of such thought and ideas leaves it not only possible but somewhat probable. Instead of confrontation or interpretational conveniences of non-intellectuality just accusations based upon faulty political based interpretations, to where it makes my opinion protect the government which you obviously are totally against let's discuss it.

1. Delusions of the possibility of being wire tapped are paranoia based.

A. The government really does not care what you do for the most part, it is after the likely criminals not the citizens it's paid to protect and serve. It does not have time to watch all its citizens. Still It is bothersome to some concerning privacy.

B. IT is unfortunate this reality of the Patriot act, however the If's given 9/11 show that possibilities do happen. An airplane going into a building differs from the domestic terrorism or can. The reality of spying, in my opinion should not have been released but it was rightfully released. A contradiction in freedom because there are psychological attributes of its reality that can be applied to those who might have tendencies towards delusional behaviors.

C. Reasoning it out, I know for certain that if such surveillance programs were not here and another event like 9/11 happened either worse or not as bad, the majority of the nation would indeed think it was stupid for not giving the government powers to protect the country. The government is not the bad guys, like any identity it does foul up, yet it is not the evil but like anything of the required orders of ways are stuck to do what it is ordered to do.


I mentioned judged being advocates and that judges should be there and was indented to protect the civil liberties psychologically of those in America. Instead you contrived differing reasons to make it seem entirely different.


Some people believe the government uses microwave beams to send them thoughts, some believe the government is the devil, some believe the government is nazi's yet the truth is not held in unfactual opinions. Just the truth as the truth is, the government changes with every cycle politically and is for the most part anew each transition phase.

Stop listening to exreme liberal propganda or the terrorist if you do think it's the truth. The government becuase it is big, yet not one identity rather compartmentalized is seen perhaps as governing force that is when disgreed with the bad guy, just like when anyone does not like something of another power, it is percieved psychologicaly with discontent.

It is not one, it is many.

Last edited by sc on 07 Feb 2006, 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm sorry, sc, but your last missive looks like your three-martini power lunch devolved into a five-martini power lunch with a Bacardi enhancement. You picked a hell of a wrong time to slur your speech on the keyboard if you want to be taken seriously on this. How stereotypical. I have actually witnessed, just now, online, someone getting drunk in an effort to be taken more seriously, or playing that part.

Either you were actually drunk or you are playing the part to make me criticize you for getting drunk so I would appear to be guilty of a personal attack. Either way, no one should take your statements seriously.

What are you talking about?

That is nonsense.. your just trying to start crap, go to another post *dude* whatever contrived things you come up with becuase rational reason you cannot stand to partake in.

Wow! I think I am going to go read some Dr. Bronner's Soap labels now. You all have a nice day!

Does that person have a website? What makes him or her so interesting to you?

No, you deliberately slurred your speech to attract flames about your spelling and syntax. I don't feel like mushmouthing about it, I will tell you straight. You deliberately try to cause trouble.

redicilious nonsense, stop starting problems.

Dr. E. H. Bronner (1908-1997)

http://www.drbronner.com/story.html

Dr. Bronner's soap labels are much better reading than incoherent rants from Nathan (sc, SimpleComplexities, Natron, etc.). By the way, I don't think he means to troll; he just can't handle himself if people disagree with his opinions, no matter how far-fetched his opinions may be, and so he resorts to personal attacks. Good choice oatwillie! Here are other Dr. Bronner's Soap labels.

http://www.drbronner.com/story.html#labels

I felt like I had to deconstruct sc's methods for the audience. They are calculated to drive anyone crazy who tries to stay with the rules of honorable and honest discussion.

All you do is put me down, you two and the other not people who have talked to me humainly are doing nothing but making me feel inferior for there ego's ITs narcisis, I will spell and gramulate anyways I want.

I was in special education in high school for grammer. I do not need your ass remarks becuase people with some sense know your being asses.

If you disagree speak inteligently, dont cuase disruption like imature children that need to go to the principles office.

Quit it.

Talk to me don't be pricks, cuase you know you are its my post not yours, start your own and stop trolling mine and putting me down.

Wimps, your like pricks in high school that just had to make fun becuase of your own infererorieties needing to feel better, acting as the narcistical source of your need to belittle.

I've already taking you three to the social ringers.. My pleasure..

Be seen for what you are as I have said, when in good merit speak to me, otherwise if your talking bull to start s**t your going to be seen for your actions (acts).

Last edited by sc on 07 Feb 2006, 4:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Remnant, I had never considered the possibility that the word salad posts could be a deliberate act by sc. That would explain a lot, though. Thanks.