Observations of humankind remain perplexing.

They are fond of their militaristic language for causes and activities that do not resemble combat and then deploy euphemistic phrasing for actual wars. So we have a War on Drugs (think catnip); more accurately a war on those that distribute and consume the drugs, or should I say, even more accurately, a losing battle against the folly of human weakness and stupidity, in which only temporary pyrrhic victories can be struck against human/lemur hybrids.

We then have actual wars that are dressed up has far more wholesome activities; a deceit necessary it appears, not only for those on the receiving end of a ‘humanitarian intervention’ or a ‘liberation’, but also for those prosecuting the conflict; an assessment supported by evidence of the frailty of human ego captured in numerous previous dispatches.

One of their previous philosopher kings was noted as saying, “Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime.” In this curious world where ingesting substances into ones own body can be consider a criminal act, I was struck by the fact that recent events do bear out the wisdom of that statement. For all the exertions of vigorously executing the War on Drugs, it seems clear no human policy maker has considered the most straightforward answer: go directly to the source, invade the territory and incentivise alternative behaviours and career choices.

Here is evidence:

Afghanistan is said to produce 90 percent of the world’s opium. But this year production is down 10 percent and there is a drop of 22 percent in the amount of land used for cultivation.

The article goes on to state the largest reductions in production have been in Helmand province, where of course, as described in recent dispatches, British soldiers have been engaged in heavy fighting throughout the summer months.

You may find this anomalous with communiques filed towards the end of the last human year, where my report stated that the opium harvest was at record levels and that the sheer quantity of opiates being shipped into Britain threatened to kill BOTH the one known as Pete Doherty and the entity known as Amy Winehorse (subject to ongoing investigation to establish species).

It seems that the strategy of conflict and coercion exercised by the British in Helmand may finally be reducing the capability and the willingness to engage in the production of opiates; this strategy of ‘Shooting Up Over There, So You Can’t Here’ is not to be sniffed at, but for full analysis it would really have to be contrasted with the Canadian approach of simply smoking their way out of problem.

| Katz |

End transmission