Get Active Subscribe Support Us

DRUG POLICIES CONTRADICT AIM OF U.S.  CONSTITUTION

Eugene R.  Dunn's letter against George Soros and anything liberal suggests that under the current aggressive Republican World War III strategy, those attacking our homeland are the only ones at risk of life or liberty. 

Yet news reports and studies consistently show that opium and heroin production and trafficking from Afghanistan -- and therefore illicit profits to the aforementioned "bad guys" -- have increased ever since. 

In fact, a few months before 9/11, the current regime in Washington provided $43 million in aid to the Afghans in exchange for a promise from Taliban leadership to outlaw poppy production. 

If increasing the cash value of resulting opium stockpiles and flooding American streets with cheap heroin does not fall under "aid and comfort to the enemy," then what does?

If this sounds familiar, there is an established historical precedent.  During a previous Republican administration, Congressional testimony made it clear that: "senior U.S.  policy makers were not immune to the idea that drug money was a perfect solution to the Contras' funding problems."

Perhaps conservatives, war hawks and drug warriors ought to read Article III, Section 3 of the U.S.  Constitution, before they complain about others providing aid and comfort to the enemy.  As drug control policies and incarceration statistics prove, we wage war on our own citizens to protect them from marijuana!

Meanwhile, political contributions protect poisonous alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical dealers and users from arrest, prosecution and asset forfeiture, even though half a million citizens die annually from the use of those products. 

Jose Melendez

DeLand, Fla.