When so-called leaders try and enforce terror scenarios upon the populace, it is usually presented as a good v bad conflict, where the good one becomes the choice for people to want to side with and help fund.
But both sides obviously have a sales pitch that claim they are the good ones to support.
However, most often, the choice is - do you support the side who commit these attrocities or do you support the side who commit those attrocities?
It's like these supposed conflicts are organised by the equivalent of a boxing promoter.
All the money they rake in for support, defined as "Aid", is distributed only between the promoter and the those in charge of the 2 battling sides.
Those doing the actual battling only see death, and their victims see no funds.
Then that's it until the next organised fight.
GG
No comments:
Post a Comment