This is a video of US troops protecting the heroin in Afghanistan, it’s not the only reason they’re there, it’s also for weapons profits, oil profits, mining profits and human trafficking profits.
Is it that simple? Well, my opinion is they planned 9/11 as an excuse to go into an endless war in the middle east. The Bin Laden family were at a Carlyle weapons/intelligence shareholders meeting hosted by George HW Bush in New York, day before the attack and flown out in a no fly zone.
George HW Bush, his father funded Hitler and was charged under the trading with the enemy act, he was the head of the CIA, three generations of his family are skull and bones, a secret society.
A secret society with a pirate flag, a headquarters called the tomb, founded by opium and slave dealers, also known as the brotherhood of death.
His nickname was Magog enemy of God from the bible.
The Rockerfellers also funded Hitler through Bayer, who patented the word heroin and released it as a cough syrup, and they worked closely with the CIA, and in making drug laws to lock people up for life for buying the drugs they were selling.
There is good reason not to get on heroin, although morphine is a pain killer used in hospitals for temporary pain relief and it’s not going away.
Opium is thousands of years old, if not millions of years old.
In my view, the problems caused by the trade being illegal are more than if they legalized it, they have a heroin program in Switzerland, cut ODs and crime in half, since the nineties.
Not a popular idea, but according to who, and why do they have this idea? Were they told that they had this idea? How do they know they even came up with the idea themselves?
Can they see the big picture and the suffering caused by jails and gangs and prostitution and crime and financial devastation caused by the same people selling the drugs having “zero tolerance” for them?
My view is no, they don’t see it, and they didn’t even know that it was the same people making the laws selling the drugs, or they might have opposed the laws they made, which in my view was simply to control the market and make more money and have more power.
The social stigma of sex in this context becomes quite dark, men want sex, they pay for sex quite quickly if the offer is available and they can’t get any, and women or girls, men or boys need money for drugs, and so they sell themselves, mostly to get money for drugs. About 80% of all crime is for money for drugs.
The drugs the government is selling while claiming to have zero tolerance. It all ties together, and all it requires is a shift towards assuming that they never had any good intentions in mind and were always purely businessmen.
My view is they invented feminism, (which they could have stopped quite easily by the way), broke apart the long held tradition of love and marriage, turned sex into a dirty thing with porn, glorified drug use with music and art, and at the same time convinced people that they were fighting against evil by pushing their zero tolerance agenda.
Harm minimization is what I’m saying is the strategy that causes the least amount of suffering, because you cannot stop people from taking drugs, and particularly you can’t stop them from having sex, it’s a primary, driving instinct.
Marriage was the harm minimization thing, it wasn’t meant to make everyone live happily ever after, it was meant to prevent STDs, rape, prostitution, kidnapping, etc, and provide a stable nuclear family unit for kids to grow up in. This was in itself a reason to try to keep it together and not lose it on drugs or alcohol.
When they first released heroin, you could buy it in a cough syrup, they had meth in chocolate, opium in cake, and cocaine in Coca Cola, and was society more screwed up then than we are now? Was it really?
People don’t always live happily ever after, if they ever do at all.
That in itself is a carefully constructed Hollywood myth and inevitably leads to disappointment and unrealistic expectations, although it’s always good to aim high.