Terrorists on Meth, Cocaine and Anti-Depressants

Originally posted by 00001
What percentage of drug users dont commit acts of violence. I know when I did drugs the only laws I broke were doing the drugs. By the way I am not doing drugs now.

The thread topic is not "Drug users are Terrorists", it is "Terrorists are Drug users".

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

Mind control/hypnotism etc,. can also produce feelings of being on drugs, floating, or just not remembering being there or doing something. Its not very hard for those that may be behind many of those crimes to inject, or falsify documentation of drug use.

The OP kind of hints on mind control in the form of hypnotism a little. I agree that must play a part in some cases.

Terrorist groups increasingly linked to drugs

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
But the potential nuts out there will read all this information and be like "cool, I'll have to start mixing drugs together more often. Thanks for the protip."

Any sort of information can be used to justify nutjobs in their behaviour. That should not deter from having an open discussion about important issues.

You are right.

I conceed my objections on the grounds that an open discussion is important.


David Grouchy

Didn't the Nazis invent methadone because they had difficulty importing heroin?

Originally posted by Darce
Didn't the Nazis invent methadone because they had difficulty importing heroin?

I dont know...did they?

Good information and it really does make sense. A good explanation for something the MSM tries to pass off as religious nutcases. There's the truth: they are on drugs that make them strong and feel invincible, and completely delusional. These drugs can make a person think they can fly. I never thought of the brainwashing connection to the suicide bombers, (the news makes it come across like the terrorists aren't smart enough to do such) that's a really good theory.

I couldn't help but think about how much of the population is on those anti-depressant type drugs, and drugs in general. And well, for whatever reason the same effects seem to be happening to the public on a more general scale, less acute than these terrorism cases, but generally speaking I would say the public is lacking more and more in empathy. It's hard to believe how callous people are when it comes to supporting wars. The majority of people who are anti-war are people who have a loved one in the military, so the sacrifice has to sort of "hit-home" for anyone to even begin to question the wrongness of these wars. The people who don't sacrifice are all gung ho about sending other people's children into battle, when they should know full well if that was their own child they would never want such a thing.

How is there such a disconnect? I don't know where it comes from, but the fact that we have this callous, narcissistic, self-absorbed populace is really good for the wars. The military vets who were on the front lines, almost all are anti-war cause they know how ugly it is. The vets who did support work and didn't actually fight, feel like they sacrificed and everyone should have to. It's just psychotic. Shouldn't we listen to those from the front lines? Not somebody who went over to a foreign country and managed supplies on a base who never saw a single battle and comes back thinking he's GI Joe, and entitled to send others to the front lines. No he should only be entitled to send others to manage supplies, not actual combat.

reply to post by Skyfloating


It seems they did, more connections to mass-murder to be made then..

The Germans invested in methadone during the second world war when their supplies of opium were cut off. During the war the Germans needed more painkillers than usual, so they got to work synthesizing opioids.

The Germans also invented heroin, which English word came from the German trademark, Heroisch, from their word meaning heroic. The German pharmaceutical company that manufactured heroin was named " Bayer" of aspirin fame.

www.medicalassistedtreatment.org...

Methadone is man-made opium, which is different from methamphetamines. It seem the Japanese made meth in the mid 1900's. Still, they are well known for mass murders in that time frame as well.

More readings;

Pervitin, a stimulant commonly known as speed today, was the German army's -- the Wehrmacht's -- wonder drug.

amphetamines.com...

reply to post by Skyfloating


Thanks for the thread !! I just wanted to share a few things that I believe to be true on this subject. Whether it be a terrorist, bank robber, hitman, I agree chemicals / drugs in most cases or a large majority of them, play a role as stated by others earlier in this thread. I do want to say however I think the drugs role in all this is a symtom of the real problem. I believe the people who do these types of things are usually set on doing them before they are medicated !!! I am an American and The US Pilots in Desert Storm were given Controlled doses of Meth to sharpen them and keep them awake during long hours of sorties. I am in no way judging anyone or defending anyones behavior. I do know I have heard countless stories of how people who "did this" or "did that" always were under the influence of something! Sometimes when kids get hyper, the parents say its a sugar rush etc

I have to be say,and I laugh, not because it's funny but if we are fair about behavior and chemicals, I would love to see some of Our Elected Officials maybe drug tested randomly cause they are acting mighty strange in my opinion.

worthy thread sky floating - as always..

Drugs can undoubtedly be used to render a person more susceptible to the kind of programming/mind control often used by fanatical ideologues in spreading their beliefs. The money spent on the mkultra horror story proves that
Manson for sure found lsd did the trick on his acolytes.

I don`t think the drugs themselves caused any specific behaviour though.

About the Beslan terrorists - Many of them (and most of thier hostages) were killed by an ill considered application of aerolsolised fentanyl. This is a stupidly potent synthetic opiate and indistinguishable from heroin in drug tests.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Kram09
Couldn't the same thing be said of U.S soldiers?

A lot of drugs were apparently used in WWI, WWII and the Vietnam-War to stay awake and suppress the horrors.

Who created methamphetamine?

Who used it on pilots to keep them awake?

Hmm.. I don't think I totally agree.

People do drugs. A certain percentage of the population is totally crazy.

Perhaps that same percentage of "normal people" that do drugs can also be found in the "crazy" population.

Originally posted by Novise
Good information and it really does make sense. A good explanation for something the MSM tries to pass off as religious nutcases. There's the truth: they are on drugs that make them strong and feel invincible, and completely delusional. These drugs can make a person think they can fly.

Yeah.. The media keeps calling Anders Breivik "the Christian" and Mohammed Atta "the Muslim" with the subtle implication that their ideology or beliefs are the cause of their behaviour. But thats just nonsense since there are Billions of people with beliefs who dont go on killing sprees.

There's certainly more to it than ideology. The psycho-chemical part seems to play a big role.

Originally posted by Darce

The Germans invested in methadone during the second world war when their supplies of opium were cut off. During the war the Germans needed more painkillers than usual, so they got to work synthesizing opioids.

The Germans also invented heroin, which English word came from the German trademark, Heroisch, from their word meaning heroic. The German pharmaceutical company that manufactured heroin was named " Bayer" of aspirin fame.

www.medicalassistedtreatment.org...

Wow...that really supports the connections I was attempting to make. Thanks. Heroin from Heroic. Sounds like it was made especially for the war.

Originally posted by CherubBaby
I do want to say however I think the drugs role in all this is a symtom of the real problem. I believe the people who do these types of things are usually set on doing them before they are medicated !!!

As in, first there's the plan or intention to do it and then, in order to be able to do it, drugs are added?

I am an American and The US Pilots in Desert Storm were given Controlled doses of Meth to sharpen them and keep them awake during long hours of sorties. I am in no way judging anyone or defending anyones behavior. I do know I have heard countless stories of how people who "did this" or "did that" always were under the influence of something! Sometimes when kids get hyper, the parents say its a sugar rush etc

Hyperactive and Violent kids having a "sugar" rush is more common than people think, I suspect. Often times parents or even police wont see the connection. They`ll just say "OK, vandalizing that building is just youthful folly" and will miss the 5 cans of soda they drank that afternoon.

I have to be say,and I laugh, not because it's funny

but if we are fair about behavior and chemicals, I would love to see some of Our Elected Officials maybe drug tested randomly cause they are acting mighty strange in my opinion.

I agree. Chemistry does seem to matter in what people think and what they do.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Thx.. Yes I was trying to say that that people aren't screwed up because they do drugs ! They do drugs because they are screwed up !! The drugs just enhance or numb the the issues at some point. My opinion.

Thx for the thread!!

Originally posted by CherubBaby
Thx.. Yes I was trying to say that that people aren't screwed up because they do drugs ! They do drugs because they are screwed up !! The drugs just enhance or numb the the issues at some point. My opinion.

I agree. They use drugs to cover-up the being screwed-up. Drugs are not the cause, they are what follows. No longer dealing with their issues they become susceptible to...strange behaviour.

If you are crazy, then you ingest meth........

You are crazier....Meth is some serious crap that really messes up the wiring in your brain.....Logic takes on a whole new meaning.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Comparing meth to coffee is like comparing a toy house to a skyscraper.

That would be a stretch, yes, and I'm not saying they're the same. Although a small, non-recreational dose of an amphetamine is virtually indistinguishable in terms of effects from a large, strong coffee. They are at different ends of the same spectrum - very different ends - but it's still the same spectrum. I'm wary of talking about meth like there's some bright line on the spectrum of psychoactives that it's on the other side of, along with all the other "hard drugs." I don't think there is a bright line, and we ought to remind ourselves that we're constantly surrounded by people who regularly consume things that are somewhere between coffee and meth in terms of psychoactive potency, and we seem to be perfectly okay with that.

Perhaps a more appropriate comparison would be meth and alcohol? This 2007 Lancet paper ranks drugs according to cost/harm to society, and alcohol has meth beat by quite a bit. Again, I'm not say they're the same thing, only that it's worth noting that we're perfectly comfortable with the pervasiveness and social use of the one, but not the other. So much so that we feel we should connect meth to terrorism, yet we don't think twice about drinking with friends. This, despite the tremendous amount of violence and crime and ill health effects that alcohol is responsible for.

So what do you have to say in defense of meth and heroin...

Well, I'm aware that there is a straightforward moral and apparently rational high-ground to be taken in this conversation that amounts to a rejection of all drugs except for strictly medical purposes. Drugs are bad, that's true, and intuitively it makes sense that people shouldn't do them and we should have laws against their use. However, that position does not appear to be very productive in reality.

It seems clear to me that human beings need drugs, and that they're as much a part of the deep structure of our lives as things like music, religion, and body decoration. I don't know how else to account for their prevalence throughout history and all over the world. Why has every prohibition ever failed? Why, as I noted before, is it so hard to find an adult who has gone the last 24 hours without any psychoactive substance?

I'm not interested in making a case for why someone should use meth or heroin. Those are drugs that have ruined a lot of lives, and for almost everyone it would be a bad idea to start using them for fun. I'm only interested in calling everyone's attention to the fact that we are a species that uses drugs, and that in Western culture our attitude towards drugs is absurd and destructive.

The first point, which I've already made, is that everyone uses psychoactives all the time. The second point is that the psychoactives that we all use, and that you can buy at Starbucks or at a bar or gas station are not fundamentally different from the illegal ones that we as a society demonize. There's a pretty smooth continuum and to designate an arbitrary cut-off between the "bad" things and the "acceptable" things is difficult to justify. The third point is that in addition to being hypocrites about these substances in general, our position as a society and the policy decisions that follow from that position with regard to certain substances and the people who use them makes the problem a lot worse than it needs to be. Anti-drug activity doesn't stop people from doing drugs. We're spending a lot of money fighting the war on drugs, imprisoning a tremendous number of people, and foregoing tax revenues while concentrating resources into of a violent and unmanageable black-market. Society as a whole would benefit tremendously from ceasing its current anti-drug activities.

That's why I don't think its of value to connect drug use to terrorism. It's an extension and reaffirmation of the existing anti-drug sentiment in our culture, which causes more trouble than it's worth. Consider all drug violence. If drugs were not so taboo, and their marketplace was just like liquor stores or cigar shops, all the drug violence would stop. It's societies current attitude towards drugs that perpetuates the taboo and makes a peaceful marketplace impossible. Is it worth it to keep that up? It's certainly not going to eliminate drug use.