Did You Hear? Texas Plans to Fingerprint EVERYONE within the Next 12 Years

Activist Post
By Daisy Luther


(In case you missed it…)

The Texas Department of Public Safety might as well be called the Texas Department of Public Invasiveness.

They’ve launched a plan to fingerprint every single person of driving age in the state, after which they will add the person’s prints to the criminal database.

Is it just me or is that a rather Dystopian plan?

Jon Cassidy of Watchdog.org writes:

The credit for breaking the news on those two items goes to consumer affairs columnist Dave Lieber of the Dallas Morning News, whose long-running “Watchdog” column often shows up in my Google Alerts, for obvious reasons.

As an old-school columnist, Lieber tends to keep his opinions subdued, and he doesn’t generally call people dishonest. But I have no problem with doing that, so I’d like to point out that the DPS spokesman he quotes at length is less than straightforward about his department’s legal authority.

Last month, Lieber broke the news that DPS had started collecting full sets of fingerprints on everyone who went in to renew their license.

Friday, he followed up with a story on DPS’ dubious legal authority to do so, and then posted lengthy quotations on the issue to his blog.

Lieber quotes an entire email from DPS spokesman Tom Vinger, who quotes Transportation Code Sec. 521.059 at length, including the key phrase, “The department shall establish an image verification system based on the following identifiers collected by the department: ….an applicant’s thumbprints or fingerprints.” (source)

So the gist of this is: if you don’t allow the “authorities” to take your prints and file them away in the event that you commit some heinous crime in the future, you won’t be issued a driver’s license in the state of Texas. This means you’d theoretically be unable to drive or get insurance, because you’d be unlicensed. If you can’t get insurance, it will be difficult to own a car. This, of course, could effect your livelihood, your ability to get your kids to school, and myriad other day-to-day issues. I’m a big fan of opting out, but this makes it a lot more difficult for the average Joe or Josephine to do so.

Doesn’t this sound like a pre-crime system, gathering evidence for the potential day in the future when they wish to use a person’s cataloged prints to identify them?  At the very least, it is an invasion of personal privacy that is being enforced by hindering one’s ability to travel freely.

According to the laws on the books, it’s legal to take ONE print, but not a set of ten.

To get the full context, you’d have to go back to the original bill that was signed into law, and then look up the relevant section of law, which states that an application for a drivers’ license  “must include:  1) the thumbprints of the applicant or, if thumbprints cannot be taken, the index fingerprints of the applicant.”

So that’s why the law mentions fingerprints – it’s index fingerprints, not a full set of 10 fingerprints. While the law mentions that those records can be used by law enforcement agencies investigating a crime, it doesn’t say anything about making them generally available in a criminal database.

According to Lieber, a political science professor at Texas Christian University named Donald W. Jackson, who has a new organization called the North Texas Civil Rights Project, is offering legal support if anybody wants to challenge this new policy in court. (source)

I bet a lot of Texans will have one particular fingerprint they’ll be happy to give – the middle one.

Hat tip to Kimo

Activist Post

Georgia in the Ebola Zone, “another viral or bacterial bomb waiting to explode?”

New Eastern Outlook
by Henry Kamens

4534533Predictably, since the US signed the Bio Weapons Convention it has invented increasingly innovative ways of circumventing it. The scientific community and public have responded by looking the other way, due to fear, ignorance or even personal safety.

One of the most favoured circumvention mechanisms has been to hide bio weapons programmes under the flimsy disguise of civilian research projects with a public health component, as has happened in Georgia and various other countries involved. But all such projects are now being placed under closer scrutiny, and are prompting a wave of denials, unsupported by actual facts, which embassies do not make when there is nothing to deny.

The US government long denied the existence of the first biolab uncovered in Georgia, despite the fact it was officially opened by the President of Georgia and named after a US Senator. Now it can be demonstrated that there are more labs here, which may be linked with any of the disease outbreaks we have seen in the region and beyond, and even the Ebola outbreak now threatening the US itself.

Inside information

In early October RIA Novosti caused a storm by blaming the United States for the deadly Ebola outbreak in Liberia and Sierra Leone, two of the West African countries known to host American biological warfare laboratories. The Russians would say that, wouldn’t they? However, they supported this allegation by quoting Prof. Francis Boyle, a leading American professor and expert on international law.

Boyle was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He might therefore be presumed to have studied this subject in some depth, and not have a reason to attack his own paymasters.

“US government agencies have a long history of carrying out allegedly defensive biological warfare research at labs in Liberia and Sierra Leone. This includes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is now the point agency for managing the Ebola spill-over into the US,” Boyle was quoted as saying. He has no doubt that what is happening is not a natural outbreak but bio weapons research gone astray and dismisses all claims that they are involved in civilian research.

“That is what they tell you. But if you study what the CDC and the Pentagon do… They say it is defensive, but this is just for public relations purposes. It’s a trick. They say, “We have to develop a vaccine”, so that’s their defensive argument. Then what they do is to develop the bio-warfare agent itself. [This is] usually by means of DNA genetic engineering. And then they say, “Well to get the vaccine we have to develop the bio-warfare agent” – usually by DNA genetic engineering – and then they try to work on the vaccine. So it’s two uses type of work,” Boyle says.

The professor claims he has “absolute proof” from a Pentagon document that the Center of Disease Control was doing bio-warfare work for the Pentagon in Sierra Leone, the country at the heart of the outbreak, as early as 1988. Indeed it was probably doing it long before then, because constructing the lab would have taken some time. “We know that Fort Detrick and the Centers for Disease Control are over there, Tulane University, which is a well-known bio-warfare centre here in USA – I would say notorious for it – is there,” Boyle says.

What we know for a fact is that more than 5,000 people have died in what is the worst Ebola outbreak in history and the first to have occurred in West Africa. It began in southern Guinea in February and has spread to Liberia, Sierra Leone and Nigeria, and the US agencies known by insiders to be engaged in biological warfare have labs in these countries where bio-agents are prepared.

Inside Georgia

The biolab previously uncovered in Georgia was the Senator Richard E. Lugar Center, which is conveniently near Tbilisi Airport. People and supplies can be brought into the country, and taken out of it, at a moment’s notice. This was also under the CDC until the Saakashvili regime fell and the story of its true purpose was broken by local journalist Jeffrey Silverman, who holds Georgian citizenship.

However this lab is a decoy. The real dirty work is done at other, less obvious facilities which have been around so long that nobody questions what they do. If the Lugar Center goes down, these other labs will carry on producing bio-agents as usual.

The jewel in the crown of the bio-weapons programme in Georgia is very probably the G. Eliava Institute of Bacteriophage, Microbiology and Virology. This is an internationally known centre of bacteriophage research and applied microbiology. This was established in 1923, as the World Centre of Bacteriophage Research, and is therefore a native Georgian facility inherited from Soviet times, not a political stunt put there by a foreign government.

During the Soviet period the Institute was part of the all-Soviet Ministry of Health, known first as the Institute of Microbiology, Epidemiology and Bacteriophages and later as the Scientific-Research Institute of Vaccines. It therefore has considerable “independent” scientific credibility. It is on this basis that it also got involved with the “civilian research” into biological agents, in conjunction with the Lugar Center.

There is also at least one other lab involved in producing bio-agents. It is in Kutaisi, a regional city where, by some strange coincidence, the Georgian Parliament was relocated to by former President Saakashvili. At this point he was running scared of mobs of protestors in Tbilisi, and seeking to build a new power base elsewhere. The other facilities people might raise an eyebrow at, such as the torture chambers in the woods near Zugdidi also uncovered by Silverman, are in areas run by Saakashvili-supporting local crime gangs.

These labs are connected by a US company operating in Georgia, Bechtel National. This is the front company holding the umbrella for conducting bio weapons research, as it has done in the countries where the Ebola outbreak originated. It has longstanding connections with the CDC and the other agencies mentioned by Professor Boyle, and also a longstanding deal with the Georgian Technology Management Company (TMC) on biological non-proliferation, as if this would be necessary.

Bechtel National and the US Naval “go between” have contracts with most if not all of the Georgian government agencies. It could therefore do all kinds of work to benefit the Georgian people, who live in crumbling blocks and are surrounded by now-dilapidated Soviet-era constructions in need of repair. But what does it actually do in Georgia?

Here is its own published list of projects:


Customer Name

Work Description




124 Aghmashenebeli ave, Tbilisi
Trenching, electric cable installation Mandeeti, Saqasria 1999


124 Aghmashenebeli ave, Tbilisi
Drain systems and parking area arrangement Mandeeti 2000


124 Aghmashenebeli ave, Tbilisi
Concrete road construction Supsa terminal and marine base 2001


Tyco engineering services
2nd Prodolnaya Str, 2 Moscow ave, Baku, Azerbaijan
Cable trenching and concrete foundation preparation and column installations Supsa 2004


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square Tbilisi,
Incinerator and generator installation for the epidemiology laboratory Kutaisi 2006


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square Tbilisi,
Sewer, gas and water line system installation outside CRL territory Tbilisi 2006


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square Tbilisi,
Temporary office building installation on CRL site Tbilisi 2006


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square Tbilisi,
CRL onsite gas and sewer line installation Tbilisi 2007


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square, Tbilisis
CRL bulk excavation Tbilisi 2007


Bechtel In Sys. Inc.
4, Freedom square, Tbilisis
Maintenance Services at the Central Reference Laboratory Site in Georgia Tbilisi ONGOING
11 Bechtel In Sys. Inc. 4 Freedom square, Tbilisi Renovation of Eliava BACTERIOFAG Institute Tbilisi 2008
12 Bechtel In Sys. Inc. 4, Freedom square, Tbilisi Construction of Transshipping Building at the Central Reference Laboratory in Georgia Tbilisi ONGOING
13 Bechtel in Sys. Inc. 4 Freedom square, Tbiliisi CRL Underground Utilities Tbilisi ONGOING
14 Bechtel In Sys. Inc. 4, Freedom square, Tbilisi CRL Site Works Tbilisi ONGOING
15 Bechtel In. Sys. Inc. 4, Freedom Square, Tbilisi. Procurement Services for BTRP project

The first of these appear to be fairly innocuous civil engineering projects. However, there is a concentration of work at the Eliava Institute, the Kutaisi lab and Central Reference Lab, the new name given to the Richard E. Lugar Center after these projects were completed, for which Bechtel itself, not an external company, is listed as the customer. Of all the work it could do, this is what it does, much to the concern of those who endure the Soviet heritage daily.

Bechtel is in Georgia to further the biological weapons programme, just as it was in Africa. The Eliava Institute, which does not have to import experts and whose work and existence are not questioned (which is why it is not near the airport) is part of the same programme. The Bechtel project list actually means that the same facilities found at the Richard E. Lugar Center, including what looks very like a mortuary, have been installed at Eliava. The Lugar Center was constructed for the express purpose of studying bio-agents, and this was considered a necessary facility for such a study.

Scientific proof

The rationale for opening the soon-to-be-declared-non-existent Lugar Center was that biological agents were causing diseases in cattle, and research needed to be carried out. Therefore biological agents were in Georgia before the Lugar Center existed, however that happened. There has also been some experimental vaccines, naturally donated by the US Department of Defense, tested on an unsuspecting Georgian population—as white rats, according to Silverman.

To build counter-agents you must first have sufficient stocks of the weapons-grade material or “infecting agent” you are trying to counter. If these were not already in Georgia they would have to be imported in order for a scientific research institute to function. Creating such a centre provides justification for importing such materials legally in any quantity.

It would be nice to know more about the three labs mentioned. As they are all now public facilities, under Georgian government and therefore public control, most of what goes on at them shouldn’t be too hard to find out. However, anyone who approaches these labs is turned away without explanation, if they are lucky. The unlucky ones have bricks thrown at them and mysteriously lose their jobs, citizenship and health insurance. They are still waiting for other explanations of why these things have happened.

When the story about the Lugar lab broke last year it was categorised as a BSL3 facility. This meant that the agents it was dealing with could cause serious or potentially lethal disease, but treatable ones. Jeffrey Silverman now says that research is actually being conducted into agents that require BSL 4 facilities, (i.e., they cause diseases for which there is no known cure). He has no scientific proof, [at least what he is willing to share] but has been right so far, and the Eliava Institute has the known capacity to do this.

Any country the US enters to serve its purposes develops some resistance to the “friendly” US presence. It is now becoming clear that whole countries will rapidly have to become BSL4 facilities to protect themselves from US dirty tricks for which there are no known cure.

Henry Kamens, columnist, expert on Central Asia and Caucasus, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

New Eastern Outlook

GM Crops and the Rat Digestive Tract: Is GM Food Safe for Animals and Humans?

Global Research
by I.M. Zdziarski, J.W. Edwards, & J.A. Carman



The aim of this review is to examine the relationship between genetically modified (GM) crops and health, based on histopathological investigations of the digestive tract in rats. We reviewed published long-term feeding studies of crops containing one or more of three specific traits: herbicide tolerance via the EPSPS gene and insect resistance via cry1Ab or cry3Bb1 genes. These genes are commonly found in commercialised GM crops.

Our search found 21 studies for nine (19%) out of the 47 crops approved for human and/or animal consumption. We could find no studies on the other 38 (81%) approved crops.

Complete study at


Fourteen out of the 21 studies (67%) were general health assessments of the GM crop on rat health. Most of these studies (76%) were performed after the crop had been approved for human and/or animal consumption, with half of these being published at least nine years after approval. Our review also discovered an inconsistency in methodology and a lack of defined criteria for outcomes that would be considered toxicologically or pathologically significant.

In addition, there was a lack of transparency in the methods and results, which made comparisons between the studies difficult. The evidence reviewed here demonstrates an incomplete picture regarding the toxicity (and safety) of GM products consumed by humans and animals. Therefore, each GM product should be assessed on merit, with appropriate studies performed to indicate the level of safety associated with them. Detailed guidelines should be developed which will allow for the generation of comparable and reproducible studies. This will establish a foundation for evidence-based guidelines, to better determine if GM food is safe for human and animal consumption.



Have enough studies been conducted to adequately state that GM crops are safe for human and animal consumption?

Genetically modified crops have been approved for human and animal consumption for nearly 20 years (Clive and Krattiger, 1996) yet the debate about their safety continues. Fifty-three crops are known to possess at least one of the genes investigated in this review (herbicide tolerance via the EPSPS gene and insect resistance via the cry1Ab or cry3Bb1 genes). Forty-seven of these crops have been approved for animal and/or human consumption, yet published toxicity studies could be found for only nine of these crops (19%) ( Table 1). Of greater concern is that for eight of these crops, publications appeared after the crop had been approved for human and/or animal consumption. We understand that other studies may exist that are commercial in confidence, but these studies are not accessible to the scientific community. Other than the few studies mentioned in the EFSA reports, where histopathological results were not reported, our review of the published literature wasn’t able to identify or locate any reported safety evaluations performed on rats on these eight crops prior to their approval. Our literature review also did not identify or locate published reports on rats for the remaining 38 crops.

The present review limited the search to only include feeding studies done on rats so that the results may be comparable. It is possible that more studies may be found if the search were to be extended to other animals. However, based on what has been found for rat studies, it is unlikely that any additional studies would involve a thorough safety investigation and a detailed report of all of the 47 approved GM crops possessing one or more of the three traits. Moreover, the rat model is the accepted OECD standard for toxicological studies of this type.

Whilst the safety of a GM crop is primarily and sometimes solely evaluated by government food regulators using the test for substantial equivalence, this is likely to be inadequate to fully assess the safety of the crop for reasons stated above. Animal feeding studies provide a more thorough method of investigating the unintended effects of the GM process or the unintended effects of ingesting GM crop components. Animal feeding studies can identify target organs as well as predict the chronic toxic effect of an ingested compound (OECD, 2008)


The evidence reviewed here demonstrates an incomplete picture regarding the toxicity (and safety) of GM crops consumed by humans and animals. The majority of studies reviewed lacked a unified approach and transparency in their methodology and results, making it impossible to properly review or repeat these studies. Furthermore, such lack of detail makes it difficult to generate evidence-based guidelines to aid in the delivery of an optimum safety assessment process for GM crops for animal and human consumption.

When considering how a better risk assessment could be done, it is important to consider systems established for other novel substances that may generate unintended effects. For example, the registration of pharmaceutical products requires an examination of both benefits and risks associated with their use and a complete assessment of those benefits and risks to establish whether the products are appropriate for general use at a range of doses. We argue that each GM crop should be assessed using similar methods, where a GM crop is tested in the form and at the rates it will be consumed by animals and people.

Whilst this provides for an effective general approach, there are additional issues for assessing GM crops that need to be taken into account. For example, the process of developing GM crops may generate unintended effects. Furthermore, the plant developed is a novel entity with genes, regulatory sequences and proteins that interact in complex ways. Therefore, the resultant plant should be assessed as a whole so that any pleiotropic effects can also be assessed. As a result, long-term animal feeding studies should be included in risk assessments of GM crops, together with thorough histopathological investigations using a variety of methods to better detect subtle changes or the beginning or presence of pathologies. Such robust and detailed studies will then make it possible to put evidence-based guidelines in place, which will substantially help to determine the safety of GM crops for human and animal consumption



Copyright © 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Global Research

Why Should the Law-abiding Care About Electronic Surveillance?

The New American
by Mitchell Shaw

electronic surveillance

It has been a year and a half since the Snowden leaks revealed what many long suspected: We are being spied on by our government. We are also being spied on by irresponsible corporations. By now it should be clear that a fundamental part of liberty in the digital age is the ability to control the data that is being mined about us and prevent that data-mining. After all, if we cannot choose who sees our private communications, browsing and spending habits, personal records, etc., can we really be said to be free? In a previous article, we pointed out several tools that can protect your privacy and liberty in the digital age. But, the attitude of many is, “Why should I care? I don’t have anything to hide.”

This is dangerous thinking for several reasons. The idea of digital liberty is still being defined by policymakers. Future generations will inherit the policies that come from our attitude toward these things. Our silence becomes acceptance, which becomes approval in the eyes of both politicians and the next generation of Americans. Imagine the world that would exist if our Founding Fathers had taken that same approach to the tyranny of their day. Thankfully, they understood that whether or not I have anything to hide, privacy is a big part of liberty. That is why the Fourth Amendment was written.

Everyone has something to hide. It’s why we have curtains and blinds over our windows. It’s why we use envelopes for our letters. We know, deep down, that our private lives should stay private. Why should we treat our digital privacy differently? What happens when you need to do an Internet search for an embarrassing medical question? What about a private, intimate text to your spouse? What about that phone call where you argue with your spouse? We do these things in private because they are private. And they ought to stay that way.

So, what can the three-letter government agencies really do? Even all this time after the Snowden disclosures, few people really understand the power these agencies have to see into our private lives. One of the most powerful technological tools they use is data-mining.

Data mining is a big problem, as we saw from the documents leaked by Snowden. But there is more to it than most people realize. In 2012, a father of a teenage girl saw for himself how powerful this form of information gathering and analysis can be. Several years ago, Target department stores started offering Redcard. It’s a credit or debit card that can be used to make purchases at Target stores and on their website. It offers a five-percent discount any time it is used. Target’s reason for doing this is simple. It ties all of your purchases together into one profile for data-analysis purposes so that they can send you advertising based on not just what you buy, but what their data analysis tells them you are going to buy. How effective is it? The father of that teenager stormed into a store outside Minneapolis and demanded to know why his daughter was receiving advertisements for baby clothes, baby furniture, and diapers. After all, she is still in high school. The manager said he would look into it and call the father in a day or so. When he called two days later, the father said that he had talked with his daughter and learned that she was, indeed, pregnant. Target figured it out before her own father did.

If Target can do that with only the information they have about your purchases at their stores, how much can the NSA figure out about you, considering that they can see every e-mail and text, all your browser history, your online maps and calendars, and more? The fact is, because they know your habits, and the habits of your friends, they are likely to know that your friend will call you tomorrow and ask you to meet for coffee, that you will accept, and where and when you will meet.

Perhaps even more frightening is that not only can government agents see the e-mails and documents you send as a finished product, but they can also see the work in progress. Because they can view your web traffic in real time, they can see you drafting documents using web-based applications such as Google Docs, online e-mail, etc. By viewing the process you use to draft a document, they are able to see backspacing and rewording, edits, and the phrases you choose to use and not use. Using psychological profiling techniques, they actually have a window into your mind as you create documents. It’s as close to mind reading as can be achieved. That is the power of the technology they are using.

President Obama assures us that “nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” so we have nothing to be concerned about. The truth is, with programs like PRISM, XKEYSCORE, BOUNDLESSINFORMANT, and others; the NSA and other agencies are collecting not only the content of our communications, but also the meta-data of those communications. They claim that they are targeting terrorists, but their “rules” allow them to target anyone within two or three degrees of a suspect. That means if you know someone who knows someone who is a suspected terrorist, you are probably being monitored. Meta-data can provide much more information than would normally be included in an e-mail or other communication. For instance, meta-data in a picture taken with a mobile phone or tablet can show information about when and where the picture was taken, as well as other identifying information. Meta-data is extremely revealing.

These are political problems requiring political solutions. We should all be actively pressuring our representatives at every level to begin dismantling the apparatus that has been put into use spying on us. They are also technological problems requiring technological solutions. Therefore, we should all also take personal responsibility for protecting ourselves and our data from both an overreaching government and nosy corporations. They will continue to escalate their programs as long as we let them. It’s time to stop the NSA from spying on us. 

The New American

Why is the Pentagon making Ebola ‘therapeutic’ and CDC Patenting Ebola strains?

New Eastern Outlook
by F. William Engdahl

4353453452The growing Ebola panic, being deliberately fanned by the criminally-irresponsible Dr Margaret Chan, the notorious “Swine Flu Pandemic” Director General of WHO in Geneva, and by the criminally irresponsible officials of the US Government Centers for Disease Control (CDC), is getting more and more absurd and more destructive by the day.

Not only do the official WHO “Ebola symptoms” list symptoms of common influenza or even severe colds. Not only is the only recognized “accurate laboratory test” for Ebola, the Kary Mullis PCR test identified by its inventor (for an entirely other purpose) Nobel Prize winning Dr Kary Mullis as utterly worthless to detect Ebola in a body. In an interview Mullis stated, “Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.” PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.

Now we discover that a new company has gone into partnership with the Pentagon…to produce “an anti-Ebola virus RNAi therapeutic” (sic). On August 4, the US TV channel, Fox News carried this intriguing lead: “The experimental drug used to treat two American aid workers who have been infected with the Ebola virus has never been tested on humans before and was only identified earlier this year as part of an ongoing research program backed by the U.S. government and military…The Defense Department has long had a hand in researching infectious diseases, including Ebola.”

DOD and Tekmira

Further research has since uncovered the following highly fascinating and highly suspicious fact about that ongoing US Department of Defense Ebola research program.

It seems the US Defense Department has joined with a biotech company named Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Its stock is listed on NASDAQ under TKMR. Tekmira labels itself as a leading developer of RNA interference (RNAi) therapeutics. Since the Ebola scare, the stock price has shot through the roof, much like Don Rumsfeld’s shares in Gilead Sciences, inventor of the Tamiflu soared after Defense Secretary Rumsfeld ordered $1 billion worth of the worthless Tamiflu for his soldiers against an earlier fake flu scare, Bird Flu.

Tekmira’s own website notes, “TKM-Ebola, an anti-Ebola virus RNAi therapeutic, is being developed under a $140 million contract with the US Department of Defense’s Medical Countermeasure Systems BioDefense Therapeutics (MCS-BDTX) Joint Product Management Office.” As far back as 2010, they state further, “Tekmira signed a $140-million contract with the DoD to advance an RNAi therapeutic, which utilized our LNP technology, to treat Ebola virus infection. In 2013, the collaboration was expanded to include significant advances in LNP formulation technology, including a new LNP formulation that was more potent, the ability to be able to lyophilize (freeze-dry) LNP formulations and an LNP formulation that can be administered intravenously.”

The same Tekmira website goes on to note that “In 2014, Tekmira signed an Option Agreement with Monsanto, permitting Monsanto to obtain a license to use Tekmira’s proprietary delivery technology…” And now Tekmira is authorized (by whom?) they state, to test their TKM-Ebola on human guinea pigs. Where?

Tekmira tells us:

Tekmira has joined an International Consortium led by the WHO, to provide an RNAi based investigational therapeutic for expedited clinical studies in West Africa. The Consortium includes representatives from the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC), at the University of Oxford, UK, the US Centers for Disease Control, Médecins Sans Frontières – Doctors without Borders (MSF), and Fondation Mérieux, among others.

With the world already in induced hysteria over Ebola, who would miss a few hundred West Africans who died of complications not from Ebola, but from the Pentagon’s TKM-Ebola human experiments. All the key players in the crime are there in the consortium running the Tekmira human tests in West Africa—WHO, US CDC, and the Doctors Without Borders.

Is Ebola and the entire Ebola scare campaign of WHO and CDC designed by its ultimate sponsors to panic the world into receiving untested or inadequately tested “anti-Ebola” medications or injections such as TKM-Ebola that are designed to eliminate a significant portion of West African populations and beyond?

Ebola and Eugenics?

345345345Interesting to note is the fact that until his recent death in a curious airplane accident, the chairman until 2010 of the US Doctors Without Borders was Richard Rockefeller, son of David Rockefeller. And, until only some months ago, another Rockefeller sat on the board of Monsanto when he died. The Rockefeller family, for more than a century since creation of their Rockefeller Foundation, have been among the most generous patrons of eugenics, including the Nazi eugenics research at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Berlin and Munich during the late 1930’s.

There are some very rich and very powerful families who deem themselves as Gods over us mere mortals. Indeed the Rockefeller history in this light is telling. In her 1993 book The Molecular Vision of Life, Dr. Lily E. Kay, described as “one of the outstanding historians of biology of her generation,” argued that the “new biology” was largely created by the Rockefeller Foundation and its subsidiary program at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) through a consensus between a scientific elite and a business elite whose broader aims centered on eugenics and the need to create a mechanism of social control and human engineering.

The term “molecular biology,” in fact, was coined in 1938 by Warren Weaver, director of the Rockefeller Foundation’s Natural Sciences Division. The scarce research money to develop the reductionist discipline of molecular biology came from the well-endowed Rockefellers. Many of the scientists involved were not even eugenics supporters, but scientists in need of research money. Kay notes many of them, even at the elite level, were interested in the pursuit of “pure science,” even though they were aware of the goals of the Rockefeller Foundation. As Kay notes, “the end result was that the ‘new biology’ would not be an open-ended investigation of ‘the riddle of life’ but would rather be a directed investigation to answer specific questions in ways amenable to the goals of eugenics and social control.”

CDC Patented a strain of Ebola?

All available evidence suggests that the ongoing Ebola hysteria from the WHO and CDC is part of just such a eugenics agenda that drove the Rockefeller Foundation to create Monsanto’s GMO varieties to contaminate the human and animal food chain.

As if the Tekmira US Pentagon link on Ebola were not alarming enough, it is worth noting that in 2010 the US Centers for Disease Control won a patent on a particular strain of Ebola known as “EboBun.” It’s patent No. CA2741523A1. They are also allowed to charge royalties for its use. Ugggg. What is the premier US Government health agency doing patenting Ebola virus strains in the first place? Patenting a virus? How is such a monstrosity possible? According to Canadian patent lawyer David Schwartz, “You can’t patent a disease condition per se, such as cancer or influenza. But if you’re talking about patenting a life form like a bacteria or virus, if altered by man, the answer there is yes.”

Welcome to the WHO and CDC and Department of Defense and what more and more is becoming clear as their “Twilight Zone,” to paraphrase the brilliant 1960’s TV science fiction series created by Rod Sterling.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

New Eastern Outlook

“This Is An Emergency Action Notification… Your Channel Has Been Force Tuned” Overtakes TV Stations For Thousands of Viewers

by Mac Slavo


Thousands of viewers in Atlanta, Austin and Dallas had their television service overtaken by the national Emergency Action Notification system today. According to Fox Engineers, the EAN can only be activated by the President of the United States, prompting questions about to how the system was able to force tune regularly scheduled programming when no emergency had been declared.

A statement from AT&T U-verse says the company is trying to figure out how and why the EAN system was activated on their network:

“Earlier today U-verse TV customers may have received an Emergency Alert notification. We have confirmed that there is no emergency at this time and we are investigating why this occurred. We apologize for any inconvenience.”

Viewers who saw the message appear on their television captured screen shots and sent them to local news stations and news web sites:


Infowars’ Paul Joseph Watson notes:

The Emergency Alert System is mandatory by law – stations have no control or power to block the signal once it is sent out by the federal government. Broadcasters are required to install and maintain FCC-certified EAS decoders and encoders at their control points, meaning the signal cannot be switched off or interrupted.

How sensible is it that the feds ‘mistakenly’ sent out an emergency alert – potentially causing panic – amidst national concerns about the Ebola outbreak in the United States?

The United States has several Emergency protocols that allow the government to take over communications systems at the behest of the President.

In 2010 Congress heavily pushed legislation that would have given the President authority to shut down the internet in the event of an emergency such as cyber attack targeting America’s financial system. The bill expired before a vote was taken, but it is believed by many that America’s domestic security agencies have already  developed and implemented an “internet kill switch” that would, among other things, give the government complete control of data across the public internet, including the ability to take major internet access points offline.

Cell phone networks have also been augmented to include Emergency Alert systems that can be initiated by the government. At Watson notes, the system malfunctioned in 2011 when messages sent to cell phone users warned their owners that they needed to take shelter because of an imminent catastrophe.

According to a report from 2012, the Federal Bureau of Investigation may have the capability to shut down entire cell phone subscriber blocks by working in tandem with device manufacturers and mobile phone companies. Hackers who infiltrated FBI records found lists that included the device identifiers, phone numbers, and address books for 12 million Apple subscribers. The infiltration suggests that the FBI has specific details about users and the networks they use to communicate, prompting fears that they could initiate this “geo fence” technology to shut down or overtake cell phone service in a specific city, region or the entire country.

Though Americans currently enjoy the ability to freely utilize their televisions, computers and cell phones as they see fit, during a nationally declared emergency everything can change within seconds.

Technology such as what the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security has implemented could potentially be used to not only alert Americans of potential emergencies, but to redirect the messages that are being broadcast to the public. Specifically, they now have complete access to shut down any news, information, videos or citizen reports that run contrary to the government’s narrative.

Those concerned with the possibility of losing communications with loved ones in an emergency should consider implementing alternate communication protocols.


America’s Weaponization of Ebola

Strategic Culture
by Wayne MADSEN

President Barack Obama has received a torrent of criticism for dispatching U.S. troops and National Guardsmen to the Ebola-ravaged West African countries of Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea to help control the spread of the highly-lethal Ebola-Zaire hemorrhagic virus. While Cuba has sent qualified doctors to the stricken region, Obama has responded with troops answering to the U.S. Africa Command in Stuttgart, Germany. 

Evidence has recently surfaced in a 2009 U.S. embassy Berlin cable to the U.S. State and Defense Departments that German authorities hesitated to send hemorrhagic fever cultures to the suspected biological warfare laboratory at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) in Fort Detrick, Maryland because the Germans feared the Army might «weaponize» the cultures.

The cable, classified as «Sensitive», is dated December 15, 2009 and states:

«German MFA [Ministry of Foreign Affairs] Deputy Head of Division for Export Control Markus Klinger provided the following non-paper to Econoff [Embassy Economics Officer], seeking additional assurances related to a proposed export of extremely dangerous pathogens to the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases. The Army’s end use certificate provided to Germany is lacking an official seal. Klinger’s deputy, Nancy Reck, noted that Germany had made two follow-up requests to the Army seeking assurances and clarifications related to this proposed export. The GOG [Government of Germany] seeks assurances from the USG [US Government] or US Army that the end use certificate and the information contained therein are legitimate and accurate».

The «non-paper» reference is to an «aide-memoire», what is known in the diplomatic world as a note without an author, source, or title that is used to prepare for negotiations. The following «non-paper», which was originally written in German, was translated by the embassy and sent to Washington:

«For Official Use Only 

Against the background of our partnership in the area of non-proliferation and our excellent cooperation in the matters of export controls, we would like to bring the following issue to the attention of your government. 

A German firm has applied for the approval of the export of 184 genetic elements with nucleic acid sequences of viruses for the production of recombinant viruses. The viruses will be used in optical imaging to identify host factors required for viral replication. The recipient in the USA is, according to the enclosed end use certificate, the Department of the Army ‘US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)’ Fort Detrick, Maryland. 

Specifications in English about the goods, the recipient and end use can be seen from the end use certificate. The goods are controlled by the Australia Group and are subject to compulsory export approval (List position C1C353A). This matter concerns the complete genome of viruses such as the Zaire Ebola virus, the Lake Victoria Marburg virus, the Machupo virus and the Lassa virus, which are absolutely among the most dangerous pathogens in the world. The delivery would place the recipient in the position of being able to create replicating recombinant infectious species of these viruses. 

Because of the particular criticality of these goods, the German federal government practices an exceptionally restrictive approval policy for such exports. An approval here can only be issued if an improper end use in association with the development or production of biologic weapons approaches can be foreclosed with a probability approaching certainty. The enclosed end use certificate is on the letterhead of the U.S. Army. The required official seal is missing, however. A decision about the export has not yet been made. Given the foregoing, we would appreciate confirmation that the end use certificate really is from the Department of the Army and of the accuracy of the data contained therein. We look forward to the continuation of our excellent cooperation in matters of non-proliferation and export controls.»

The German government specifically stated that the ability of Fort Detrick to «create replicating recombinant infectious species» of dangerous hemorrhagic viruses could violate international controls on the export of dangerous weapons of mass destruction that are enforced by the Australia Group of signatories to biological, chemical, and nuclear export treaties.

The Germans are in a position to be well aware of past U.S. involvement in biological warfare operations, especially in Zaire, where, in 1976, the first major outbreak of the Zaire Ebola virus, referenced by the Germans in their aide-memoire, occurred near the Ebola River in northern Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo).

In 1976, while the CIA was experimenting with Ebola and HIV in Zaire as part of its illegal covert war against the Marxist government of Angola, Orbital Transport und Raketen AG (OTRAG), or Orbital Transport and Rockets, Inc., a Stuttgart-based West German corporation closely linked to West Germany’s Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) intelligence service and the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), helped establish a huge 100,000-square mile rocket base in the Shaba (Katanga) province of Zaire. 

The base was not only involved in launching rockets but also in providing the CIA with a base of operations against the Marxist government of neighboring Angola. The authorization for the CIA to use the OTRAG zone as a base of operations for its illegal support for right-wing guerrillas in Angola came from Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and the operations were carried out by CIA director George Bush.

OTRAG’s Zaire base was shut down in 1979 and it was relocated, courtesy of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, to the Libyan Desert in 1981. Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev was so concerned about the OTRAG base’s offensive capabilities he pressured French President Valery Giscard d’Estaing to weigh in with Mobutu to force the base’s ouster from Zaire. The German government’s present concern about the American weaponization of hemorrhagic fevers that have plagued Zaire/Congo indicates that Brezhnev was correct in suspecting the actual purpose of the OTRAG base. The first Ebola outbreak in Zaire in 1976 coincides with the start of operations at the OTRAG base.

The CIA’s longtime Technical Services Director, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, who came up with various ways to infect CIA targets like Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, Cuba’s Fidel Castro, and Iraqi leader General Abdel Karim Kassem with lethal toxins, admitted to a congressional hearing that as early as 1960 he disposed in the Congo River a large quantity of viruses to contaminate anyone who used the river for drinking water.

The U.S. embassy in Lusaka, Zambia was quick to report in an October 3, 2008 cable to Washington the outbreak of an unknown virus among six South African members of a safari group on the Lower Zambezi River that was caused by «person-to-person transmission may be via bodily fluids — vomit, saliva, blood, etc.» However, with only preliminary evidence from the CDC, the embassy was quick to rule out «Ebola, Marburg, and Crimean-Congo» as the cause of the illness of the South Africans. 

The Walter Reed Johns Hopkins Cameroon Program (WRJHCP), based in Yaoundé, Cameroon, and involving both the CIA-connected U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. Military HIV Research Program (USMHRP), has been closely «monitoring» Cameroon’s border with the Republic of Congo for Ebola and other hemorrhagic fever outbreaks.

It is not only in Africa that the United States is suspected of violating the 1972 Biological Warfare Convention by engaging in bio-weapons research. In addition to the United States, an October 4, 2008 cable from the U.S. Mission in Geneva to Washington stated that Ukraine, then under the rule of pro-NATO President Viktor Yushchenko, was insisting that compliance with the Biological Warfare Convention was the responsibility of «individual scientists’» adhering to unenforceable «codes of conduct.» 

Another 2008 cable from the U.S. embassy in Manila describes how the U.S. Centers for Disease Control assisted the Philippines in examining the outbreak of the milder form of Reston Ebola in the Philippines swine stock. The Reston strain gets its name from a 1989 outbreak of Ebola at the Reston Primate Quarantine Unit in Virginia, near Washington, DC that killed a number of primates. The facility was linked to Ebola and Marburg virus research at Fort Detrick. Viral outbreaks in Southeast Asia, such as that Ebola Reston swine outbreak in the Philippines, also involved researchers from the U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit (NAMRU-2) in Jakarta, Indonesia. Several Indonesian health officials and politicians have charged that the U.S. Navy facility is not only involved in bio-warfare research but also directly assisting U.S. Big Pharma companies in research of airborne influenza, such as H5N1 avian flu, as well as anthrax, infectious bursal disease, and other pathogens. 

Indonesian Health Minister Siti Fadilah Supari charged that NAMRU-2 was illegally sending biological specimens out of the country. Indonesian Foreign Minister Hasan Warijuda demanded to know why NAMRU-2 personnel enjoyed diplomatic immunity. Soeripto, the Deputy Chair of Parliamentary Commission III on Law and Human Rights, claimed that NAMRUs were a front for intelligence activities and called for NAMRU-2’s immediate closure. In 2010, the Indonesian government ordered NAMRU-2 to close and it was relocated to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. NAMRU-2 maintains a detachment in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. 

The Navy continues to maintain NAMRU-3 in Cairo, NAMRU-K in Nairobi, NSAMRU-6 in Lima, and a special detachment in Bangkok. These facilities are engaged in the same type of «research,» including of hemorrhagic fever and influenza outbreaks, which resulted in NAMRU-2’s «walking orders» from Jakarta. All these Navy units have relationships with the perennially suspect USAID, which maintains its own «Public Health Team.» Personnel from NAMRU-3 and the U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine in Landstuhl, Germany were sent to Kuwait in August 2009 to investigate the sudden outbreak of H1N1 swine flu among U.S. troops stationed at Camp Arifjan. 

U.S. activities at Landstuhl, Stuttgart, Germany’s OTRAG base in Zaire, and a research institute seeking to export Ebola and other deadly pathogens to Fort Detrick have focused on Germany as a nexus for America’s quiet treaty-violating bio-warfare research. One single cable out of a tranche of 250,000 cables released to WikiLeaks has provided the «smoking test tube» for this illegal research that may be behind the current Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

Strategic Culture


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,083 other followers

%d bloggers like this: