posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 10:56 AM
a reply to: ttobban
The point is, that if you really agree with me, then you ought to be dead against attacking this thing backwards.
Things we agree upon:
Nothing will change for the better, as long as the MIC remains.
The current measures have nothing to do with solving the MIC problem.
In order to solve the problem which is the ACTUAL source of all the drugs, terror, surveillance initiatives and so on, something must be done to
destroy the deep state, the progeny of the MIC.
If you agree with any small part of this, then you must surely know how futile, pointless, and actually harmful this recent batch of nonsense will
be. You know all too well, that once efforts APPEAR to be made on a particular front, it is easy, beyond easy for a government to look as if it is
doing the right thing, while actually achieving NOTHING. You also know that this kind of sleight of hand is not new, that it has defined the last few
decades of policy and governance in general in the United States. You also know that for all that acts have been passed before on this issue, nothing
changed. And you know that because nothing changed, people still die of drug overdoses, dirty needles, bad drugs...
You should not have to defend your point at all. The only reason you do, is because there is something wrong with it, and that is the fact that you
are supporting this effort at all. Knowing how much of a sleight of hand trick it is, knowing that it is nothing else, knowing that all its going
ahead will do is further obfuscate the reality of the problem it fails to deal with, how can you defend the action at all? How can you say that you
are happy for up to $25 Billion dollars (the real estimated cost of the wall) to be spent on a parlour trick?