Its been said that the Queen Of England is the kingpin of world drug-dealing. Before we deride this idea, let us subject it to some sort of serious analysis
Sometimes analysis begins with asking a lot of questions. The questions are somewhat leading in this case, because I want to provide CONTEXT. Not enough is said about CONTEXT in science. People talk a lot about content, evidence and proof, although if they are mainstreamers there is nothing they hate more then evidence, or the assumed need for evidence. But context is very important.
Here are a few questions to set the context.
1. Did much of the British upper class engage in the opium trade in the 19th century?
2. Was the opium trade ever officially illegal during this time?
3. When did the opium trade end?
4. Is it not the case that the opium trade NEVER ended? Is it rather simply a case of substitution between opium smoking and heroin injecting?
5. Do large drug-dealing operations ever get closed down internally?
6. Can anyone ever think of even one sizable drug-dealing network that closed itself down?
7. Supposing you think that the opium trade was wound up? What date was that again?
8. Was it not the case that the royal family, during the 19th Century, gained financially from the opium trade?
9. If the royal family did not gain from the opium trade, why did they let other members of the aristocracy carry on this trade, and them not wetting their beak?
10. With a horribly illegal, immoral, and fantastically profitable opium trade going on, could any member of it, so much as propose a windup, without fearing for his life?
11. When was it a good time to wind up the opium trade without bringing massive opprobrium on the crown? For surely to try and wind up the opium trade is to admit that you have been trading in opium right?
12. The day Great Britain wound up the opium trade …. What was that date again?
13. Can anyone suggest a plausible sequence or plan for Britain to have extracted itself from the opium trade?
14. Does anyone remember the date when this series of steps actually took place?
15. Surely by the outbreak of World War II one would have wanted to get out of the opium trade. Now supposing that the war itself, and the abdication of the King, served as an excellent opportunity to extract oneself from this dirty business??? Was that the right time to be forgoing a source of funds, with the Empire having been militarily defeated at Dunkirk?
16. What about after the allied victory? Could we expect the impoverished Britains, to refrain from kicking that can down the road, when communism was threatening most of Europe?
17. What was that date again when the British shadow government rolled out of the opium trade?
You see the reality is that the Anglo-American shadow government never wound out of the opium trade. They are up to their eyeballs in drugs. And they have two drug money-making wings. The illegal and the legal drugs. The American cousins network has most of the cocaine, but the British still run half the opium racket. They cut a deal with the Chinese to carve the business in half. Which is why Britain has refrained from going to war on Americas side, whenever China was involved.
The ruling class, is the shadow government, and drugs is one of the businesses they monopolize on. The proposition that Elizabeth isn’t the titular head of the opium trade is there to be disproved, and not the other way around.