hmmm....
good points....if you examine the track record, going all the way back to Reagan (the drooling old B-movie actor), these 'modern' Republicans have a history of doing exactly what GOD was saying, which is to install a puppet leader, usually chosen from the indigenous rebel populace, beef him up with arms and money (american arms and money. To my knowledge, no american was ever asked) until he gets too big, then, usually he would tell Washington to 'fuck off', upon which the cycle began...they did this with Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, they did it with Saddam Hussien...and, probably, they did it with Bin Laden.
The way this all happens is that the CIA generally foments revolution in areas where the govt doesnt toe the line w/ Washington, usually by infiltrating. How do they infiltrate? By throwing money around, something usually in short supply among rebels worldwide.
Saddam was the cia answer to the Iran threat in the 80's....many of you youngsters will go, 'Iran threat'????
In the late 70's there was a boogeyman named Ayatollah Khomeini, and he was the leader of Iran. He took power in Iran, when 'our'
boy, the Shah of Iran, was ran out of town. (reava pahlavi, I believe his name was, and yes, we had a hand in his rise to power as well)....we needed a counterweight, and we got that by bulking up a local bully named Saddam.
The story in Panama?
Same thing, we needed someone near nicaragua, they were rebelling, it was a hot spot with rebel activity, blahblahblahblah
(late 80's)
Now, we segue to the late part of the decade, and russia is invading afghanistan. Since the cia knew russia was having a lot of internal problems, they reverted, as always, to their universal strategy;
Enter Bin Laden....
Anyone who doesn't believe the cia/govt uses the very drugs they whine so much about to fuel wars is a fool.
Another, darker aspect to what the govt does here is the widespread distribution of dominator drugs to help generate the funds necessary
by 'living off the fat of the land', so to speak....in other words, in
Nicaragua it was cocaine, and military transports...in Afghanistan, its poppys.
An ancient chinese war tactician named sun-tzu posited that it is sound military strategy to divest the land of its assets in order to conquer the populace. If I dont have to carry supplies with me, I'm faster and fresher. Extend this concept in your own mind.
This is a far-reaching strategy in which the geographic region itself supplies the means for the generation of revenue.
We don't have to send money 'over there' ....we let them grow the money, then we swoop down, shoot 8 afghanis at a remote airstrip
and seize a cool hundred mil or so in poppy-derivative. Now the plane goes to govt connex, but the dominator poison still hits the streets just the same as if a 'real' criminal had put it there.
The real problem within this whole subject is actually a fairly simple one once the idea occurs;
We've been masterfully maneuvered into a defensive position concerning our drug use, AND, we've allowed them to feel as if they're in the right, morally.
Where do they derive these righteous stirrings?
Whenever ANY social class gets stepped on enough, eventually, they will begin resisting. This happened in India, this has happened in America.....
Gandhi has already shown ALL OF US HOW TO WIN THIS WAR.
Why wont we listen?
good points....if you examine the track record, going all the way back to Reagan (the drooling old B-movie actor), these 'modern' Republicans have a history of doing exactly what GOD was saying, which is to install a puppet leader, usually chosen from the indigenous rebel populace, beef him up with arms and money (american arms and money. To my knowledge, no american was ever asked) until he gets too big, then, usually he would tell Washington to 'fuck off', upon which the cycle began...they did this with Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, they did it with Saddam Hussien...and, probably, they did it with Bin Laden.
The way this all happens is that the CIA generally foments revolution in areas where the govt doesnt toe the line w/ Washington, usually by infiltrating. How do they infiltrate? By throwing money around, something usually in short supply among rebels worldwide.
Saddam was the cia answer to the Iran threat in the 80's....many of you youngsters will go, 'Iran threat'????
In the late 70's there was a boogeyman named Ayatollah Khomeini, and he was the leader of Iran. He took power in Iran, when 'our'
boy, the Shah of Iran, was ran out of town. (reava pahlavi, I believe his name was, and yes, we had a hand in his rise to power as well)....we needed a counterweight, and we got that by bulking up a local bully named Saddam.
The story in Panama?
Same thing, we needed someone near nicaragua, they were rebelling, it was a hot spot with rebel activity, blahblahblahblah
(late 80's)
Now, we segue to the late part of the decade, and russia is invading afghanistan. Since the cia knew russia was having a lot of internal problems, they reverted, as always, to their universal strategy;
Enter Bin Laden....
Anyone who doesn't believe the cia/govt uses the very drugs they whine so much about to fuel wars is a fool.
Another, darker aspect to what the govt does here is the widespread distribution of dominator drugs to help generate the funds necessary
by 'living off the fat of the land', so to speak....in other words, in
Nicaragua it was cocaine, and military transports...in Afghanistan, its poppys.
An ancient chinese war tactician named sun-tzu posited that it is sound military strategy to divest the land of its assets in order to conquer the populace. If I dont have to carry supplies with me, I'm faster and fresher. Extend this concept in your own mind.
This is a far-reaching strategy in which the geographic region itself supplies the means for the generation of revenue.
We don't have to send money 'over there' ....we let them grow the money, then we swoop down, shoot 8 afghanis at a remote airstrip
and seize a cool hundred mil or so in poppy-derivative. Now the plane goes to govt connex, but the dominator poison still hits the streets just the same as if a 'real' criminal had put it there.
The real problem within this whole subject is actually a fairly simple one once the idea occurs;
We've been masterfully maneuvered into a defensive position concerning our drug use, AND, we've allowed them to feel as if they're in the right, morally.
Where do they derive these righteous stirrings?
Whenever ANY social class gets stepped on enough, eventually, they will begin resisting. This happened in India, this has happened in America.....
Gandhi has already shown ALL OF US HOW TO WIN THIS WAR.
Why wont we listen?
:
