Posted on 09/16/2002 10:52:55 AM PDT by JediGirl
With the anniversary for 9/11 came the opening of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's "Target America" touring propaganda exhibit.
The taxpayer-funded museum mockery implements the same simplistic logic the DEA loves about drugs and the connection between narcotic trafficking and terrorism, while omitting the real story about the failed U.S. "War on Drugs."
What? Did some Americans say that they would like to see an exhibit that tells the story about that failed war, the abuse of billions of taxpayer dollars to interfere with other nations' governments and to harass and imprison thousands of our citizens? Well, though it isn't funded by millions of taxpayer dollars, the D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project has responded to the targeting of America - and Americans - with its own exhibit that tells a different story of terrorism and the war on drugs.
The exhibit ( at www.mpp.org/TargetAmerica ) is called "Target America: The DEA and You," and deals with acts committed by government agencies that may have the look and feel of terrorism to their American victims.
Subject matter for the MPP exhibit includes the story of raiding legal medical cannabis dispensaries and taking the medicine from the sick and dying, to killing innocent people such as missionaries Roni and her one-year-old daughter Charity Bowers, killed by a drug interdiction flight and 20-year-old Jose Colon who was visiting a friend at a home where police later found eight ounces of marijuana.
The MPP site is dedicated to 18-year-old Esequiel Hernandez, shot ( in the back ) and killed by U.S. Marines ( The Marines were operating illegally according to U.S. law that does not allow - yet - for our armed forces to patrol in this manner inside our borders, though the Desert Post WEEKLY has received accounts of at least one other recent USMC internal policing operation in California, unverified by authorities ) while tending goats outside his Texas home. Documentation of the coldly cruel harm done to AIDS and cancer patients by the DEA's raids in this state ( leading to the largest number of American citizens seeking political asylum in Canada since Vietnam ), as well as an analysis of the real links between the drug war and terrorism.
This is the brain of drug czar John Walters. Crack. This is John Walters' brain gone mad on taxpayer money, power and greed.
Not pretty is it?
Uh you are missing the point again, a conservative society will bring about a conservative government.
We live in the days where the ACLU/Libertarian/Anarchic factions have made great strides in society in the last 40 years and we have seen the results and it seems that you want more of that.
You think you've answered them? Could you point out exactly where, then, because I don't think you have, unless you think "because Soros is for it" is a legitimate answer.To make it easy for you, I'll even start you off:
"Why should conservatives interested in shrinking the size and influence of the federal government support the War on Drugs?"Simple, because conservatives believe X, Y, and Z, and moreover, the government has the power to do so because of A, B, and C.
Why should conservatives interested in returning this nation to a constitutional republic support the War on Drugs?"
Simple, because the War on Drugs does X, Y, and Z, and this will help restore our nation to a constitutional republic.
We live in the days where the ACLU/Libertarian/Anarchic factions have made great strides in society in the last 40 years and we have seen the results and it seems that you want more of that.
No, you're missing the point. The DEA, the drug war, the propaganda, is all a product of the liberal idea that government can and should solve all of society's problems, because society simply cannot be trusted to cope with it. You seem to think that it will lead to a conservative society, but it will not. Liberal government will not produce a conservative society, but sheep. Conservatives are not sheep. The liberalization of the government started in the 30's. The hippies didn't invent it, but they did use it as a mechanism to advance their agenda. You don't want to dismantle the mechanism, you just want to find a way to turn it against them, and it isn't going to work like you want it to.
Soros sent me a Drug Abuse Negation Engine (D.A.N.E.) Mark II and I just "discuss" drug laws with it now in the convenience of my own home.
Dude get a few high fives for your dream saber. At least no one take you seriously. You are a loud mouthed malcontent who bashes a good political friend of the body which connects the body to the Chicoms, also "small" issues to you again, but that still doesn't negate the facts that socialist Soros is the meat derived from the blood.
Sheesh how about not hiding behind jimrob for a year, and you are pushing is that I live in a business point of view, you pot advocates are woefully inept, just like a good meal. Coffee also tastes good and is uesd in social situations to help someones daughter is verboten in Wyldkard land.
See? If you set your Soros decoder ring to gamma-epsilon-seven and follow the standard procedure you can get ordering instructions for one of these things.
Nope, hubris got your brain?
Anyway, your x,y, and z thinking shows why Libertarians are called inverted marxists.
Marxists in the Soviet Union always had an x,y, and z answer for every problem without taking morality and other factors into consideration and look where that got them.
Libertarians do the same.
No. I'm honestly just waiting for your answer and trying to frame everything so that you can't weasel away.
Anyway, your x,y, and z thinking shows why Libertarians are called inverted marxists.
Marxists in the Soviet Union always had an x,y, and z answer for every problem without taking morality and other factors into consideration and look where that got them.
Yes, we know that for some inexplicable reason you think we're Marxists. I'm interested to know why you think supporting the federal War on Drugs is the proper choice for conservatives, so let's move on.It seems like your answers to my questions are going to involve morality and undefined "other factors." Care to answer my two questions now?
I am not either. Crickets should be what's heard when dealing with hubris.
You mean hubris like insisting that those who oppose the War on Drugs are in league with Soros and Marxists?Obviously, you can't or won't answer my questions. You had a great opportunity to prove once and for all that supporting the Drug War was proper for conservatives, and you blew it. All you could muster up was "because Soros is for it." Not exactly a stellar argument there, Dane.
Uh my point is that socialist and Hillary friend Soros is the main money backer for validating drugs.
You can ride on the back of what I consider dirty leftist money for all I care, but denying that Soros is a "minor" player begs a response.
You can ride on the back of what I consider dirty leftist money for all I care, but denying that Soros is a "minor" player begs a response.
Here we go 'round in circles.For the sake of argument only let's say that yes, your whacked-out theory that because Soros is for drug legalization, the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy is interested in making all drugs legal. We'll even say for the sake of argument it's their only plank. If that's the color of the sky in your universe, so be it.
Can you now answer my questions? Make a conservative argument in favor of the Drug War.
For the sake of arguemnt my "theory" is not whacked out.
I cannot help it if you want to wish George Soros away. A fact is a fact and the fact is that socialist and Hillary friend George Soros is the major backer of pro-drug organiztions in the US.
You can cry and moan all you want, but that still doesn't change the fact.
Kofi Annan saying that Saddam Hussein is a "minor" player in terrorism and me having to hear that socialist and Hillary friend George Soros is a "minor" player in drug validation.
You can cry and moan all you want, but that still doesn't change the fact.
Another dodge. What is it with you?Make a conservative argument in favor of the Drug War.
Whatever. Make a conservative argument in favor of the Drug War. Can you or can't you? I'm tempted to go back to the first time I asked you my questions and count how many times you've responded to me and still haven't answered them other than by parroting a version of "because Soros is for it."Is your conservatism based on Soros alone? Do you base all your political stances on Soros' stances? If, say, Soros was for the War on Terrorism, would you be against it?
Since Soros is a major leftist it is a sure thing that he is against the War on Terror and is for drug validation.
What that leftists are against the War on Terror and are for drug validation.
Go visit DU(democrats underground) and you will see a myriad of posts against the War on Terror and for drugs.
JMO, but I think that you will like it there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.