Saturday, October 31, 2009

The Upcoming Swine Flu Pandemic: Labelling Vaccine Resistors As "Extremists"!

There is definitely a battle going on for the public minds. One camp is trying to persuade people that there is a pandemic approaching and that they MUST take their prescribed swine flu "vaccine" as a method of preventing their own deaths. The other camp is warning people about the dangers of the prescribed "vaccine" and that the pandemic is a lot of hype done to purposely scare people into taking the vaccine. With more evidence coming out that shows that the swine flu pandemic is indeed a lot of hype, people are now turning against taking the vaccine period!

The governments now realize that they cannot easily persuade people to take their prescribed vaccines. Therefore, they are resorting to tactics such as labelling people as either criminals or extremists if they do not take their shots! Here is an article that I found through that states that the Chief Medical Officer in England is serious about branding anyone who refuses the vaccine as "extremists"! My notes to follow:

Comments ignorant of public backlash against swine flu shot

Steve Watson
Friday, Oct 30, 2009

The Chief Medical Officer in England has described those who are speaking out against the mass swine flu vaccination campaign as “extremists”.

The comment made by Sir Liam Donaldson, the government’s senior advisor on health matters, was highlighted in a Times of London article today.

“We have had a lot of unfair public criticism and attacks in an attempt to scare people about a vaccine that’s potentially life-saving,” Donaldson said in reference to anti-vaccination posters depicting the H1N1 shot as a “weapon of mass destruction”.

“We have seen it before with vaccines like MMR [the combined jab for measles, mumps and rubella], and now extremists are doing the same thing again.” he added.

Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish Health Secretary added:

“Vaccination is our best defence against this virus and I urge everyone who is in the priority groups to accept the vaccine when invited to do so.”

Donaldson’s remarks are ill thought out considering the fact that senior neurologists have voiced concerns over the adjuvants in the H1N1 flu vaccine and the fact that it has beenrushed through safety procedures, with manufacturers provided with blanket immunity from potential lawsuits.

In addition, multiple opinion polls have revealed that half of GPs in Britain have severe reservations and doubts over the safety of the shot.

A much larger Nursing Times magazine poll in August also found that 30% of all frontline nurses said they would refuse to be immunized, with another 33% saying they were unsure over the vaccine.

50% of pregnant women in the UK have also said they will refuse the vaccine.

No matter, apparently the government believes you are an “extremist” if you don’t shut up and take it.

Donaldson’s comment is also especially relevant in the wake of news that police in Britain havedefined political activism as “domestic extremism” and are treating people who attend demonstrations as criminals, cataloguing them on multiple national databases.

NTS Notes: This is bordering on lunacy! The governments are going overboard in their attempts to obviously FORCE people to take their vaccines. What is their purpose in doing this? We now know that the vaccine is worse than the flu itself, and will weaken the body's own immune system. Is there something nefarious about the government's actions then? You, the readers, obviously must judge for yourselves.

My recommendations do not change in spite of the government rhetoric. Take your vitamins, especially Vitamin D. Keep yourselves healthy by eating right and keeping your bodies free of their poisons, and you most certainly will reduce your risks of getting swine flu!

More to come


From The Files Of Absurdity, Volume XLVIII: Schools Banning Halloween Costumes For "Political Correctness"!

Well, its Halloween 2009, and tonight is a time of long standing tradition where we dress up in scary costumes for fun and send our children out into the neighborhoods to go door to door to scream "Trick Or Treat" and collect bags of high fructose sugary candies that for the next week or two will have them climbing up the walls high on sugar, and rotting their teeth! Isn't Halloween grand?

But it is all for fun, and sometimes in these troubling times, we need to have some real fun! Who cares if the Politically correct maniacs out there are now trying to find ways for banning Halloween because of its Pagan rituals, and what it stands for according to them. It is just good clean fun!

However, I came across the following article, and I said to myself "Come on now! This is getting to be too much!" It seems that US schools are now banning Halloween costumes for being too scary and "Politically Incorrect"! Here is the article, from, and my comments to follow:

Boo! US schools put the frighteners on scary costumes for Halloween

Clampdown on cloaks, masks and weapons that could upset or offend

By Guy Adams in Los Angeles

Saturday, 31 October 2009

A girl in a party dress chases a toy bat as schoolchildren trick or treat in Burlington, Wisconsin this week.


A girl in a party dress chases a toy bat as schoolchildren trick or treat in Burlington, Wisconsin this week.

Be careful with those Halloween costumes: they might just spook someone. That, at least, is the prevailing wisdom in America's schools, where the national obsession with "trick or treat" is being compromised by the dead hand of political correctness.

In a country where few things are quite so terrifying as an expensive lawsuit, and pagan tradition sits uneasily with religious conviction, many teachers have started banning small children from dressing up in a manner that could upset, offend, or even scare their peers. Out go vampire cloaks, zombie masks, plastic weapons, and fake blood. In come "princess" dresses, cuddly animal outfits, and the occasional jauntily placed top hat.

Fangs and fingernail extensions are completely verboten; witches' robes are frowned upon. Instead, costumes must be broadly "positive".

Not all of this is new: US school boards have for years been issuing broad guidelines about costumes, accessories and behaviour that it permitted at the sometimes elaborate, and always eagerly anticipated dances and parades that take place each 31 October.

However, in the past, they've tended to clamp down only on outfits and accessories deemed either antisocial (messy, coloured hair spray, for example), dangerous (fake daggers, axes or other weapons) or in some way racially insensitive.

This year, by contrast, children are being prevented from wearing some outfits on grounds that they're ever-so-slightly scary – so could upset young people of a delicate disposition, or be offensive to conservative Christians.

In Illinois, a school district told its children to dress up as "historical characters" or "food items" rather than the more time-honoured option of witches and ghosts.

"We're balancing traditions with the times we live in," said a spokesman. "Several years ago, there was some push-back in our community. Some people thought Halloween was a Satanic ritual. Well, let's not say Satanic ... let's say they were not comfortable with what it represents."

Riverside Drive Elementary, a state school in the San Fernando Valley just north of Hollywood, meanwhile woke up yesterday to find that its sternly-worded memo to parents about "costume appropriateness" of their children at yesterday's Halloween parade had been leaked to the New York Times.

It specified six rules: "They should not depict gangs or horror characters, or be scary," read one. "Masks are allowed only during the parade," read another. "Costumes may not demean any race, religion, nationality, handicapped condition or gender," said a third.

Under Riverside Drive Elementary's guidelines, the newspaper wryly observed, Little Bo Peep would be considered acceptable, but her shepherd's crook would not. The school's headmaster declined to comment, but some parents were not so reticent.

"Can't parents have discretion?" complained Joel Bishoff, whose young son plans to attend the school's parade dressed as a box of breakfast cereal.

NTS Notes: It seems that we are sliding fast into a time where people and children can no longer have any fun. For the last century there was absolutely no problems with children dressing up in scary costumes because people knew they were both harmless and for fun!

This belongs in my Files Of Absurdity for the simple reason that the Political Correction Police are now trying to prevent children from being children. Let them have their fun and damn these idiots for not having a life!

So, Happy Halloween everyone! Lets keep it as a tradition for having some good clean fun!

More to come


Friday, October 30, 2009

Some Rational Thinking About The Swine Flu Vaccine

There has been a massive push here in Canada to have more people inoculated from the "dreaded" Swine Flu virus. The news media here has been on a tear since a recent report of a 13 year old hockey player out of Ontario that died just days ago from Swine Flu. Little news has come out since this child's death, or even if an autopsy was performed to find out how the Flu actually killed him. My take is that evidence may finally come forward that this child had an unknown internal health problem that led to his death by the flu. You rarely ever hear of healthy people falling over dead from the flu because the flu itself usually kills people with other health issues.

The problem has been that now many Canadians are in a panic due to the MSM here overblowing this situation. People are demanding that the Canadian government accelerate the production and distribution of the Swine Flu vaccine, in spite of clear evidence that the vaccine will do more damage than the flu itself!

Keeping that in mind, I found this new article via Mike Rivero's website that originally came from an Edmonton, Alberta, Canada independent online news service:, that questions the ethics and necessity of taking the flu vaccine shot. Here is the article, with my comments to follow:



Connie Howard /

Follow flu news and you'll soon be a little nervous, confused and probably bored. So why am I adding yet another piece? Because our major media outlets have massively underreported important findings of the Cochrane Collaboration on flu vaccines. "There is no evidence whatsoever that seasonal influenza vaccines have any effect, especially in the elderly and young children. No evidence of reduced [number of] cases, deaths, complications," the Cochrane Collaboration's Tom Jefferson recently said in an interview with Maryann Napoli of the Center for Medical Consumers.
Who is Jefferson that we should take seriously a statement as startling as this one? He is a medical doctor, an epidemiologist and the leader of an international team of researchers who have combed through a mountain of flu vaccine research.

This is highly relevant to the current swine flu vaccine frenzy—not only will Alberta be offering the regular flu shot alongside the swine flu shot, but the swine flu strain isn't nearly as novel, nor as dangerous, as we've been led to believe. An analysis published in the British Medical Journal says it is of "the same subtype as seasonal H1N1 that has been circulating since 1977."

In Australia, where the flu season is ending, there have been 186 deaths out of nearly 22 million people. That was with no vaccine available. Our thinking has again been shaped by, as Noam Chomsky in his signature matter-of-fact manner would say, a media that is primarily a public relations industry whose function isn't so much to inform as to manufacture consent.

The constant message has been that flu vaccines—swine or regular, with or without largely untested adjuvants—are necessary, safe and effective. But that message doesn't line up with the science. Flu-related mortality rates in the US have been flat over the past 20 years, despite ever-rising immunization rates. Higher vaccination rates in the elderly have actually resulted in higher mortality rates in that same group. During years where viral-vaccine mismatches have occurred, or where production or compliance was particularly low, death rates remained the same.
"Will you be lining up for your flu shot?" I asked one of Canada's own vaccine scientists, Health Canada whistleblower Dr. Shiv Chopra. "No," he said. "There's no out-of-the ordinary threat, and no evidence of either safety or efficacy."

Which lines up with what Jefferson said—trials have been small, short term, and rather than measure real outcomes against control groups, they've measured results on antibody levels. They tell us almost nothing about how safe or effective they are in the long term.

Chopra's answer also lines up with what we know about vaccine adjuvants from lab research—squalene, a previously unapproved adjuvant but present in the new GlaxoSmithKline shot we'll be receiving, causes rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and an MS-like paralysis in lab animals. It has been strongly linked to anthrax vaccines and Gulf War Syndrome.

For those who dismiss adjuvant fears as baseless, the German news magazine Der Spiegel has reported that German government officials, the military and pregnant women will be receiving an adjuvant-free vaccine; Glaxo's Pandemrix (similar to the Canadian version now approved) has been ordered for the rest of the population.

"In 1976 we experienced similar panic about impending swine flu disaster," says Chopra in his refreshingly quiet and calm manner. "Two hundred fifty million doses of vaccines were distributed." That vaccine program was halted because it was harming so many.

The gap between public health measures and the science is, once again, disturbing. As is the World Health Organization's new definition of pandemic. While a pandemic was once defined as a rapidly spreading virus resulting in widespread death, it is now defined as simply a rapidly spreading virus. The requirement of high mortality has been dropped. It's a handy change, when you consider that fast-track vaccine approvals need the justification of a pandemic.

The flu vaccine frenzy simply isn't supported by the science; that it is medical science fundamentalists who are most outraged by vaccine resistance is highly ironic.

NTS Notes: This is a fabulous article that shows clearly the dangers of the vaccine, and the fact that the time for a major pandemic to take place has actually passed!

Therefore, what is to gain by taking the flu shot now? Answer: Absolutely nothing in terms of the flu itself, but risking major health problems by the side effects of the ingredients in the vaccine should be everyone's main concern!

More to come


From The Files Of Absurdity, Volume XLVII: Propaganda Push For Flu Vaccines Reaches Level Of Absurdity!

It looks like people are finally waking up to the true dangers of taking the government prescribed influenza vaccines. It seems that no matter how hard they try to use their MSM BS to try to scare people into lining up, rolling up their sleeves, and taking the needle full of great stuff like thimerosol, and squayleen, people are not buying their BS and refusing the vaccines.

I came across the following article through that states that the latest ploy by the governments to get people to take their vaccine poisons is to claim that their vaccine has great health benefits! Here is the article, with my comments to follow:

Swine flu vaccine shots eliminate wrinkles, bad breath and varicose veins, too (opinion)

Friday, October 30, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
Key concepts: Flu shot, Clinical trials and Flu shots
View on NaturalPedia: Flu shot, Clinical trials and Flu shot

(NaturalNews) The propaganda push for flu vaccines has reached a level of absurdity that's just begging to be made fun of. Today, a flu vaccine story appearing in Reutersclaimed that injecting pregnant women with flu shots wouldincrease the birth weight of their babies by half a pound. That same story claimed flu shots are so healthy for pregnant women that they also prevent premature births.

It even quotes a team of experts who claim that injecting an expectant mother with a flu shot would reduce the hospitalization of her infants, explaining: "Flu vaccine given to women during pregnancy is 85 percent effective in preventing hospitalization in their infants under 6 months of age."

This conclusion was derived from a study of pregnant women in Bangladesh, by the way, and it didn't even use randomized, placebo-controlled study protocols, meaning the conclusions of the study are highly unreliable (more vaccine quackery).

Speaking of bizarre claims, another Reuters report appearing this week claims that statin drugs prevent flu deaths!

This story reports, "Patients taking statin drugs were almost 50 percent less likely to die from flu, researchers reported on Thursday in a study providing more evidence the cholesterol-lowering drugs help the body cope with infection."

How was this "science" conducted? There wasn't even a clinical trial at all. Researchers simply checked the medical records of people who died from seasonal flu infections and found that 3.2% of the patients who weren't taking statin drugs died from flu complications while only 2.1% of the patients who were taking statin drugs died. Since 2.1% is roughly 50% less than 3.2%, they leaped to the conclusion that "statin drugs prevent flu deaths by 50 percent!"

Flu shots prevent wrinkles!

When it comes to pushing drugs and vaccines, Big Pharma never misses an opportunity to misrepresent science in order to fabricate statistical support for some silly claim. Using the same statistical quackery as the drug companies, I could easily design a meta-analysis study that would findflu shots prevent skin wrinkles. And then, with a little help from Big Pharma it would be a simple matter to get some medical journal to publish the article. The mainstream media, for its part, would then declare, "Flu shots prevent skin wrinkles!"

But why stop there? Flu shots might also eliminate bad breath, too. Proving so would be an easy matter, too: Just take 100 people with various levels of bad breath, give flu shots to those with the freshest breath, then resample their breath levels following the flu shots. Voila! Those who got the flu shots have the freshest breath!

(Although this sounds incredibly stupid, it's exactly how some clinical trials are designed from the start: Certain groups are included in the study, or eliminated from the study, solely based on how well they will support the desired outcome...)

Send this "research" to Reuters, and you might even get a write-up: "Flu shots prevent bad breath, say scientists."

In fact, using the right study design, flu shots can be "proven" to prevent almost anything, including varicose veins, shyness and gray hair. It all comes down to how the study is designed from the start. With proper statistical revisions, virtually any substance can be proven to prevent -- or promote -- almost any health condition.

Clinical trials are a joke

That's because in modern medicine today, clinical trials are a joke. When a researcher sets out to create a study or clinical trial with a pre-ordained conclusion rather than an open mind, he can accomplish that in a variety of ways: By excluding study participants that don't fit his conclusion, by eliminating data sets from meta-analysis studies, by controlling the timeline of the study to end it before side effects start to appear, and so on.

This definitely is one for my Files Of Absurdity for the audacity of governments to put out such BS propaganda! Whats next from these idiots? Swine Flu vaccine cures Cancer, AIDS, and is a great dietary supplement?

Here is a better idea: Just say NO to the Vaccines and take better care of your health!

More to come


From The Files Of Absurdity, Volume XLVI: Is The US Secretary Of State This Clueless?

I constantly am reading through hundreds of articles daily to observe what the MSM and the real truth tellers, the bloggers, are posting for their readers. It seems the more I read, the more I see that the MSM is out of touch with reality!

I came across the following article through the Canadian news service;, and it just made me laugh so hard that I quickly realized it belongs in my Files Of Absurdity! It seems that either the US Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton is totally clueless, or she is one great master of deception! Here is the article, and you decide:

Clinton puzzled at Pakistan failure to find Osama bin Laden

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gestures during her visit to the historical Badshahi Masjid in Lahore October 29, 2009. Clinton said on Thursday it was "hard to believe" that no one in Pakistan's government knew where al Qaeda leaders were hiding, striking a new tone on a trip where Washington's cre

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gestures during her visit to the historical Badshahi Masjid in Lahore October 29, 2009. Clinton said on Thursday it was "hard to believe" that no one in Pakistan's government knew where al Qaeda leaders were hiding, striking a new tone on a trip where Washington's cre

Photograph by: Pool, Reuter

"I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to," she told a group of newspaper editors during a meeting in Lahore.

"Maybe they are not 'get-at-able'. I don't know," she said.

Clinton's pointed remark was the first public gripe on a trip aimed at turning around a U.S.-Pakistan relationship under serious strain, but bound in the struggle against religious extremism.

"I am more than willing to hear every complaint about the United States," Clinton said, ""but this is a two way street.

"If we are going to have a mature partnership where we work together" then "there are issues that not just the United States but others have with your government and with your military security establishment."

Clinton, who has sought to use her own personal outreach to overcome rising anti-American sentiment in Pakistan, earlier repeated her conviction that the two countries' common interests far outweighed their differences.

"I am well aware that there is a trust deficit," Clinton told students at a "townhall-style" meeting at Government College University in Lahore.

"My message is that's not the way it should be. We cannot let a minority of people in both countries determine our relationship."

Clinton's arrival in Pakistan on Wednesday was overshadowed by a car bomb blast that ripped through a market in the city of Peshawar, killing more than 100 people, in one of the largest recent attacks by Islamic militants seeking to destabilise the nuclear-armed country.

Clinton urged Pakistan's youth to stand firm against the forces of religious extremism, saying it threatened everything that both Americans and Pakistanis hold dear.

She carried the same message in her meetings with Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and other high officials in Islamabad on Wednesday.

Clinton was due to meet Pakistan's army and security chiefs on Thursday, where she was expected to discuss Pakistan's latest military campaign against extremists in South Waziristan as well as the U.S.-led war against Taliban religious militants in neighbouring Afghanistan.


U.S. officials have cast Clinton's visit to Pakistan as a chance to counter anti-American broadsides from extremist religious leaders and to showcase Clinton's personal affinity for a country she says she knows and loves deeply.

On Thursday, she toured the massive red sandstone Badshahi Mosque in central Lahore, extolling the cultural achievements of a country more often in the headlines for political and religious strife.

But the tense security situation in Pakistan was clear. Gunmen stood guard in the mosque minarets, while Lahore's normally busy main streets were emptied and armed police kept bystanders penned back in narrow alleyways as Clinton's motorcade sped past.

While acknowledging the many bumps in U.S.-Pakistan relations, Clinton nevertheless asked for understanding, patience and commitment, saying her own experience in deciding to join the Obama administration after running against Barack Obama for the presidency was instructive.

"What we have together is far greater than what divided us," Clinton told the students, referring to her relations with Obama. "And that is what I feel about the United States and Pakistan."

NTS Notes: I have a great idea. I will send Ms. Clinton a shovel myself, and tell her to start digging. Maybe she can find Osama Bin Laden before anyone else in Pakistan does!

This is absolutely un-flipping believable indeed! Osama Bin Laden has been dead since late 2001, and now this clown who calls herself the US Secretary of State is asking the Pakistanis why they can't locate a dead guy? Yes, Ms. Clinton, it is "hard to believe" that people cannot locate Bin Laden, unless they take a shovel and dig at his grave site!

We know the real reason why Clinton is in Pakistan, and that is to try to prop up and show support for the US puppet government there!

This definitely belongs in my Files of Absurdity for the ridiculous, and clueless comments by Hillary Clinton in regards to searching for a DEAD nemesis!

More to come


One last thing: Will someone please send a memo to the US Secretary of State and tell her that Osama Bin Laden is long dead and buried? Thanks!

What Are US Troops Dying For In Afghanistan?

I have said it before, and more and more the evidence is quite clear: The war in Afghanistan is lost, and the troops must come home! Right now, the war in Afghanistan is costing the US taxpayers approximately 3.5 - 4 BILLION dollars a month! Between that war and the occupation of Iraq, the American taxpayers are forking over 200 BILLION dollars annually! This is outrageous and a severe drain on a nation bordering on total bankruptcy!

Besides the monetary cost, there is the issue of the corrupt government that is propped up by the Americans themselves. The corrupt Karzai was installed by the Americans as the Afghan President against the will of the Afghan people. Then they had a bogus election where Karzai was predetermined to win by fixing the voting. The elections were exposed as a farce and a fraud, and new "run off" voting is pending. Karzai himself is proving to be out of America's control, and the wrong choice as America's man in Kabul. There is new talk about "removing" him along the lines of when the Americans removed the corrupt Diem from office, via CIA assassination, in South Vietnam back in 1964! And people wonder why Afghanistan is becoming America's newest "Vietnam" fiasco?

Here is a new article by Bill Van Auken through the website, that asks and answers the hard questions as to WHY US Troops are dying in Afghanistan! My comments to follow:

What are US troops dying for in Afghanistan?

29 October 2009

At least 21 US soldiers and Marines have been killed in Afghanistan since last weekend, making October the bloodiest month for US forces since they invaded the country eight years ago. Still more have been wounded by roadside bombs, rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.

Among those killed in the last several days was a 24-year-old California mother of two young daughters, Sgt. Eduviges Wolf, who died of wounds suffered when her vehicle was attacked with a rocket-propelled grenade in Kunar province.

Devin Michel, a 19-year-old Army private, little more than a year out of high school in Stockton, Illinois, was killed by a roadside bomb in Zhari province.

Gregory Fleury, a 23-year-old Marine corporal, lost his life in one of the three helicopter crashes on Sunday. The Anchorage Daily News quoted his grandfather as saying that, after serving two tours in Iraq, Fleury was set to end his active duty, but “the government extended his service” for deployment to Afghanistan. He had been scheduled to come home in early November.

The escalation of the war, which President Barack Obama is expected to announce soon, will only drive up casualties, as tens of thousands of additional soldiers and Marines are sent into Afghanistan to suppress popular resistance to foreign occupation.

What are these sacrifices for? Why are young American men and women being sent seven-and-a-half thousand miles from US shores to face horrible deaths and to carry out brutal repression against a population that does not want them there?

These questions are posed all the more sharply by the revelation that the US Central Intelligence Agency has kept President Hamid Karzai’s brother, a reputed kingpin in Afghanistan’s multibillion-dollar drug trade, on its payroll for the last eight years.

The CIA’s ties with Ahmed Wali Karzai raise “significant questions about America’s war strategy, which is currently under review at the White House,” the New York Times said Wednesday in reporting the connection.

This is putting it rather delicately. The ties between the Karzai brothers and the CIA are a further demonstration that “America’s war strategy” is a criminal enterprise pursued by criminal methods.

The newspaper describes a highly intimate relationship between the CIA and Ahmed Wali Karzai, who helped found a paramilitary outfit known as the Kandahar Strike Force that “operates at the CIA’s direction” in carrying out assassinations of suspected “insurgents.”

CIA special operations agents, meanwhile, utilize compounds provided by Karzai as bases for their own operations in the south of the country.

According to the Times, military officers and other American officials say that “Mr. Karzai’s suspected role in the drug trade, as well as what they describe as the mafia-like way that he lords over southern Afghanistan, makes him a malevolent force.” Nonetheless, he remains one of Washington’s key assets in the country.

Afghanistan currently supplies 90 percent of the world’s heroin. Since the US invasion of the country, opium production has increased by more than 300 percent.

CIA ties to drug trafficking are longstanding. Before 1979, there was no large-scale poppy cultivation or any production of heroin in Afghanistan and Pakistan. These countries became the center of world heroin production as a byproduct of the CIA’s fomenting of a war by Islamist mujahedin against the Soviet-backed government in Kabul. While the US poured in billions of dollars in money and arms to fuel this war, drugs provided a major supplementary funding source for the CIA-backed guerrillas.

In the 1980s war against Nicaragua, the shipment of cocaine into the US provided resources for the CIA-backed contras at a time when the US Congress had cut off funding. And in the Vietnam War, the CIA allied itself with heroin-trafficking warlords in Laos who exploited the US troops as a market.

In all of these wars, US intervention has produced death, destruction and social degradation, including the proliferation of drug production and consumption. An inevitable byproduct of the ongoing intervention in Afghanistan will be a steady rise in heroin addiction in the US and around the world.

Are US troops dying to keep in power a government dominated by drug-trafficking warlords? Will more be killed in the coming month to protect another fraudulent election aimed at lending a façade of legitimacy to this regime?

So it would seem. But the Karzais and their warlord allies are puppets of US policy, used by Washington as merely a means to an end.

The end itself is patently not the furthering of “democracy.” Nor are 100,000 US and NATO troops fighting terrorism in Afghanistan, where military officials admit there are no more than 100 Al Qaeda members.

The real objectives of this war were spelled out in fairly candid terms in an article published last year in the magazine of the US Army War College by Dr. Stephen Blank, the college’s professor of National Security Studies.

Entitled “The Strategic Importance of Central Asia: An American View,” the article wastes little time on the pretexts of combating Al Qaeda or building democracy in Afghanistan.

Blank argues that the US is pursuing an “open door” policy in Central Asia “for American firms seeking energy exploration, refining, and marketing.” US policy, he says, is aimed at “the prevention of a Russian energy monopoly” in Central Asia or the region’s domination by China. It also seeks to isolate Iran, another potential regional rival.

“Not surprisingly,” Blank continues “the leitmotif of US energy policy has been focused on fostering the development of multiple pipelines and links to foreign consumers and producers of energy” that bypass the control of these regional rivals. Among the most important of these, he writes, is the proposed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) pipeline, which would pump oil and natural gas out of Central Asia across the territory now occupied by US troops.

It would appear from this paper that, while soldiers and Marines are told that they are fighting and dying for democracy or to end terrorism, at least the US Army’s rising senior officers are being given a more concrete objective.

The American military is fighting in Afghanistan as part of a 21st century version of the “Great Game,” in which US imperialism is seeking to dominate Central Asia and its energy resources at the expense of its strategic rivals.

There is no doubt that the Obama administration will continue to pursue these aims through an escalation of the Afghan war.

The costs of this war, now pegged at $3.6 billion a month, will rise even higher with the deployment of more troops, and will be paid by working people in the US through attacks on their living standards and basic social benefits. The death and maiming of American soldiers and Marines will escalate, along with the slaughter of both Afghan and Pakistani civilians.

The interests of the working class in the US and internationally stand opposed to those being pursued through the killing and dying in the so-called AfPak war. Working people must demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all American and foreign troops from the region and an end to the drive for imperialist domination in Central Asia.

Bill Van Auken

NTS Notes: The points in this article are very factual and point clearly to the fact that America has lost this war, and should withdraw from Afghanistan as soon as possible.

This article does a great job of pointing out the fact that since the American invasion in 2001 to remove the Taliban, the Poppy fields, and the Opium trade is exploding! And yes, the CIA has always been involved in the drug trade, and using drug profits to finance their proxy wars.

BUT the hard fact that America was ordered by their Zionist Rothschild masters to commit troops to Afghanistan to secure and protect their Opium fields for profit is not mentioned. The idea of a "Great Game" is valid in terms of America needing to dominate and secure vital energy sources in that region, but isn't that why American troops are still in Iraq? The more valid and obvious reasoning for being in Afghanistan then falls back on protecting the drug trade for the Zionist masters....

The facts are still that America is fighting this war for all the wrong reasons, and history will show that they are on the wrong side in this fight. It is time for people to demand that their governments bring the troops home!

More to come


Thursday, October 29, 2009

From The Files Of Absurdity, Volume XLV: Branding Nursery School Students In UK Racists!

When I found this article, I could not believe how far down our society has slid over the last few years. It has been a while since I picked on anything coming out of the UK for my Files Of Absurdity, but it seems that right on queue here comes something totally ridiculous.

Here is the article, from online news service. I will leave it up to readers to judge for themselves about the ludicrousness of what it implies. My comments to follow:

Thousands of nursery school children branded racist by teachers... before they know what the word means

Last updated at 12:47 AM on 30th October 2009

Read more:

As many as 40,000 youngsters a year are being wrongly branded racists as new rules force schools to investigate every playground spat, according to a new report.

Children in nurseries and primary schools are being disciplined over racist insults even before they know what the terms mean, it claimed.

A growing army of diversity 'missionaries' may be fuelling tensions instead of easing them, warned the report from the Manifesto Club civil liberties group.

These race advisers and bureaucrats are said to be increasing the divide between white and black youngsters by forcing them to see the world through the filter of race.

Innocent: Reporting racism by young pupils wastes teachers' time, a study says

The report said a child had been severely disciplined for calling two other children a 'chocolate bar'. Another child had been punished for calling a boy 'white trash'.

Report author Adrian Hart said: 'The obligation on schools to report these incidents wastes teachers' time, interferes in children's space in the playground, and undermines teachers' ability to deal with problems in their classrooms.

'Worse, such anti-racist policies can create divisions where none had existed, by turning everyday playground spats into "race issues".

'There are a small number of cases of sustained targeted bullying, and schools certainly need to deal with those.

'But most of these 'racist incidents' are just kids falling out. They don't need re-educating out of their prejudice - they and their teachers need to be left alone.'

Under rules introduced in 2002, schools must monitor and report all racist incidents to their local authority.

Teachers are required to fill in special referral forms detailing the incident and punishment.

According to the report The Myth of Racist Kids, around 280,000 incidents have been reported in England since full records began.

Many involve pupils still at primary school, it said.

Out of 5,000 incidents in Yorkshire in 2006/07, for example, the majority were in primary schools.

Meanwhile Essex County Council figures show that most of the children involved in reported racist incidents were between nine and 11.

One teacher told researchers that anti-racist interventions had led to 'an absolutely awful atmosphere around the school'.

'Children who used to play beautifully together are starting to separate along racial lines,' the teacher said.

The Manifesto Group is calling for 'adult politics' not to be projected on to children and compulsory reporting of racist incidents to be abolished.

Martin Ward, deputy general secretary of the Association of of School and College Leaders, said: 'Certainly any racist incident in schools should be dealt with swiftly but the definition of racism can be taken too far, especially with young children who clearly don't understand the connotation behind the words.'

But Schools Minister Diana Johnson said: 'If racist bullying is not dealt with in schools, then this will send a powerful message to children that racism is acceptable - not only in schools but in society as a whole.'

Read more:

NTS Notes: What ever happened to children being children? It seems that the thought police in Great Britain have definitely gone overboard in terms of the absolute ridiculous and disturbing idea of going after children for crimes of racism! Whats next? Branding newborn babies as "racists"?

This definitely belongs in my Files of Absurdity, but it is definitely an alarming trend....

More to come