Rand Paul On Islam

[MSimon]

WW2 in the Pacific was in part a war to control the drug trade

Bullshit.

The only thing close to that was in Southeast Asia and China where we turned a blind eye to Chiang & Co. in order to gain basing and access rights to go after the Japanese.

Funny thing ladajo, Google is at your fingertips and you didn't even check.

Try this

"Japan opium Manchuria" or "Japan opium ww2"

You can't beat me on this stuff because unlike so many fools I have actually studied it. In depth.

====

Now add this up. Chiang. Hmong. Afghanistan.

All places where the US policy has either turned a blind eye or even assisted the opium trade. If the intent of our policy was to wipe out the trade in order to end opiate addiction why would we be doing that?

Actual US policy is not to stamp out the trade but to control it. Mostly through proxies. Why? Good question.

Because the banking cartel depends on the huge profits gained from turning black money white:

http://classicalvalues.com/2011/11/why- ... ohibition/

http://www.madcowprod.com/2012/07/27/hs ... -big-jail/

http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/narcoDollars.pdf

http://classicalvalues.com/2012/11/only ... portation/

I have more links. Want them?

[MSimon]

The economic system as we know it is corrupt from top to bottom.

It depends on creating misery and destroying lives for its gains.

A crack in that system has been created with legalization of pot in Colorado and Washington State. The crack is spreading and widening.

People are going to start looking into other drugs and their history.

What do you think world people's thoughts of the US are going to be when this stuff is widely known?

Some day the economic history of silicon valley will be known. I was discussing it back in '67 with a NSC engineer. Drug money was rushing into San Jose. Why? An easy way to turn black money white and profit from it. A 50% or more failure rate? Hot money doesn't care. It is only poor slobs like you and me who have to be careful with their investments.

Go on any thread where appropriate at

http://www.zerohedge.com/

And mention the bank/drug cartel connection. Those folks know what is going on. You will get assent on the matter. It is not even controversial. I have seen many comments in passing.

====

Best of all - anyone who ever supported prohibition will be considered an accessory to crimes against humanity. I'm preparing the ground with this little ditty.

Medical Marijuana prohibition is a crime against humanity and a violation of the religious precept - heal the sick.

[MSimon]

It helps to look at the business globally as the United States is the world leader in global money laundering. According to the Department of Justice, the US launders between $500 billion -- $1 trillion annually. I have little idea what percentage of that is narco dollars, but it is probably safe to assume that at least $100-200 billion relates to US drug import-exports and retail trade.

http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/narcoDollars.pdf

========

Written by some lone internet nut? Nope. Catherine Austin Fitts.

Catherine Austin Fitts is a former managing director and member of the board of directors of Dillon Read & Co, Inc, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner in the first Bush Administration, and the former President of The Hamilton Securities Group, Inc. She is the President of Solari, Inc, an investment advisory firm. Solari provides risk management services to investors through Sanders Research Associates in London.

[Diogenes]

WW2 in the Pacific was in part a war to control the drug trade

Bullshit.

The only thing close to that was in Southeast Asia and China where we turned a blind eye to Chiang & Co. in order to gain basing and access rights to go after the Japanese.

Funny thing ladajo, Google is at your fingertips and you didn't even check.

Try this

"Japan opium Manchuria" or "Japan opium ww2"

You can't beat me on this stuff because unlike so many fools I have actually studied it. In depth.

Good! How much opium did the Japanese sell to the Chinese in the lead up to their invasion, and how did Japanese war strategy dovetail with their opium supply efforts?


If Opium is harmless, why was it part of the Japanese strategy to weaken China? (While making a profit.)

[ladajo]

Simon,
The US did not enter WW2 in the Pacific in order to control the drug trade.
Whatver the British and French were up to was their business (and problem).
Japan was motivated by resources access, a form of Manifest Destinyitis, as well as fear of Russia. They were not seeking war in order to take over the drug trade.

Has the drug trade been used as a lever in larger issues? Yes.
Was the objective of the US or Japan in taking the path to war to control the drug trade? No. Bigger things were at stake.

Your internet conspiracy view of the world is surely tainted by your internet conspiracy view that "The Man" is denying drugs to the masses for power and profit.

You let your clouded fantastic views color your interpretations of things and twist or misrepresent them to support your mythical world.

It has been known for centuries that 'drugs' like opiate based ones can and do destroy lives in a manner beyond the control of the victims.
You have become a useful idiot to others.
You really think that dropping controls will reduce 'crime". It is the same logic as saying if we don't call it murder, then murder rates will drop.
Addicts will spend money to get what they want. They don't give a crap who sells it to them. Removing controls will only result in more addicts.
So guess what, "The man" is going to get his money either way. One way destroys societies and lives of many, the other destroys the stupid few.

Here, take a walk through history and see if you notice any themes...

http://cbn.nic.in/html/opiumhistory1.htm

It may require original thinking, which to date has not been your forte.


This is just a test of the new system pay it no mind - Simon

[choff]

One of the most entertaining websites where you can follow the corruption and decline is maxkeiser.com, the guy is hilarious.

[MSimon]

Here, take a walk through history and see if you notice any themes...

http://cbn.nic.in/html/opiumhistory1.htm

It may require original thinking, which to date has not been your forte.

Funny. I was going to introduce that link in a previous post. But I thought I had done more than enough.

Now I get your point. Opium has been used to destabilize countries. Especially where it is introduced as a recreational drug. How is the destabilization done? Some one gets a monopoly. Raises prices. If illegal, users have to bring in new customers to pay for their supplies. If legal - the monopolists get most of the profits. That is what made Chinese concessions so valuable.

BTW I did not say opium was the only or even the main reason for war with Japan. It was one of the reasons. We wanted our SOBs to have the concessions. You remember Chiang? Don't you?

And for a history lesson you might want to look up the "American China Clipper trade" what were American ships taking to China?

=====

Now what is the state of the US? Opiate consumption is as strong as ever. But we import fewer opiates than we used to. Diversion from legal supplies is how it is handled.

The Swiss have a program for meeting the needs of the users. And guess what? Without the pusher aspect of the illegal market the average age of users is rising. Same for Portugal which has legalized use but not supplies.

In the US before opiate prohibition about 1.3% of the population used opiates. Since prohibition about 1.3% use opiates. What exactly are we getting for our money? The criminals are supported who otherwise would have to get regular jobs. So there is that.

And then there was the Dr. Marks study in England which proved that if users could get regular supplies about 1/2 could hold down jobs. And theft in the area where it was tried use declined by >90%. Here is some evidence by Dr. John Marks.

I am a consultant psychiatrist in Widnes, northern England and prescribe hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Ironically I may not prescribe hasheesh, nor opium nor coca. This is like being able to prescribe cognac but not wine. Nevertheless this policy has eliminated drug deaths, there is no H.I.V. infection, and a police study of our program shows a 15-fold fall in drug-related acquisitive crime. Most interestingly, the incidence of addiction has fallen 12-fold.

http://universitydegree.files.wordpress ... lin082.pdf

Now you say I'm immune to reason. And this may be in fact true. Reason is not always reliable. Checked out AGW lately? So what is reliable? Evidence. And you seem immune to that. What kind of engineer is immune to evidence?

[MSimon]

Here is a 60 minutes episode and interview with Dr. John Marks that you might have missed. I do admit that what the Dr. says is unreasonable. But it is evidence.

Sunday, December 27, 1992

By: Ed Bradley

Ed: Can Britain teach us anything about dealing with drugs? That remains to be seen. But one thing seems certain, there is little or nothing we can teach them. They tried our hard line methods back in the 70's and 80's and all they got for their trouble was more drugs, more crime, and more addicts. So they went back to their old way of letting doctors prescribe whatever drug a particular addict was hooked on. Does it work? If they're ever going to know, Liverpool, where drugs are out of control is the place to find out.

Ed: This is a gram of 100% pure heroin, it is pharmaceutically prepared. On the streets it would be cut 10 to 15 times and sell for about $2,000. But take it away from the black market, make it legal, and heroin is a pretty cheap drug. The British National Health Service (NHS) pays about $10.00 for this gram of heroin. And for an addict with a prescription, it is free.

Ed: In Britain, doctors who hold a special license from the government are allowed to prescribe hard drugs to addicts. Dr. John Marks is psychiatrist who runs an addiction clinic just outside of Liverpool and has been prescribing heroin for years

Dr. Marks: If a drug taker is determined to continue their drug use, treating them is an expensive waste of time... and, really, the choices that I am being offered and society is being offered, is drugs from the clinic or drugs from the Mafia.


http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/60minliv.htm

[ladajo]

Mike,
You keep pointing to the "Swiss" and "Portugal" as magic answers. They are not. Your consistently misrepresent them as success cases.
They themselves say the jury is out, and things are not all roses.
The Swiss in fact have rolled back their program as we have discussed here many times. The initiatives brought unintended side effects, and a realisation that the costs were extreme for benefit gained. They also have never scaled it up, due to costs, and last I heard were talking about cutting it back again. As for the legal shops, the drug tourism and associated crime has become a issue they are struggling with now.

Portugal is an interesting one for me. I have been there a number of times, and can say it has large areas of heavy poverty. The drug problems in these areas is truly an epidemic that is eating out the the heart and sole of the people. I have friends their and they are seriously worried about the future of the country. The economic issues and drug problems run hand in hand for them, due to economy of scale.

Intersting you point out the US shipping. America's economy has always been a function of the Sea Lines of Communication. We have also historically never shied from shipping whatever we can between whomever we can. It is in our blood as a seafaring nation. It has earned us more than one war.
Most folks do not understand that for instance the War of 1812 was a war over the sealanes and shipping. The US burned both ends fo the candle running commerce with a massive commercial shipping infrastructure supplying critical needs to all combantants in the European Theater. England finally got tired of it, and took action. First they started with taking "English born" crewman in an attempt to not only man their warships, but also harm US shipping capabilities. This impressment then expanded into cargo seizures, and even stopping and seizing crew from US Ships of War. The US side was seeking to maintain the trade, and then drove ourselves to war by enacting embargoes (cutting our own fiscal throats in the process) in an attempt to punish the English by denying suppies to Wellington in Spain, as well as providing trade goods to England.
Part of the trade even back then was global drugs shipping. But you should note that the US merchants never lead the global drug shipping effort. Did we play in it, sure, as did every one else, however it was fleeting in comparison. So this can not be used as a primary argument point to support the theory that we were 'all in' for supporting drug trade. We were not. It was an ancilllary commercial interest at best.
Chiang was not propped up as you suggest (and parrot from Internet Conspiracy Theorists), to allow our corrupt government to get rich from drug trade. Chiang was/is a classic case study example of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", with the "for now" caveat attached. Joe Stillwell had a hugely contentious relationship with Chiang, and as a result with his US counterparts and superiors. All with the aim of gaining and maintaining access to another front against the Japanese. Strategically, we knew the Japanese were resource constrained, and causing further constraints, demands, and divisions of the existing resources is what doomed them in the war. We did this well, and Chiang was part of it. So much so that we set him up on Formosa when the Communists kicked his butt. But not so much that we did not sacrifice Taiwan in 1972 to bring Vietnam to culmination.

[MSimon]

http://reason.com/archives/2013/02/06/c ... ical-islam

Some libertarians argue that western occupation fans the flames of radical Islam – I agree. But I don’t agree that absent western occupation that radical Islam “goes quietly into that good night.” I don’t agree with FDR’s VP Henry Wallace that the Soviets (or Radical Islam in today’s case) can be discouraged by “the glad hand and the winning smile.”

Americans need to understand that Islam has a long and perseverant memory. As Bernard Lewis writes, “despite an immense investment in the teaching and writing of history, the general level of historical knowledge in American society is abysmally low. The Muslim peoples, like everyone else in the world, are shaped by their history, but unlike some others, they are keenly aware of it.”

Radical Islam is no fleeting fad but a relentless force. Though at times stateless, radical Islam is also supported by radicalized nations such as Iran. Though often militarily weak, radical Islam makes up for its lack of conventional armies with unlimited zeal.

Almost two years later. And radical islam is on the march. ISIS was not even on the map then.