FEMA Camp Mass Incarceration Is A Goal of the Ebola Crisis

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

For a number of years, the topic of FEMA Camps (i.e. American concentration camps) have been rumored to exist. Jesse Ventura, on his show, Conspiracy Theory, revealed to the public the existence of FEMA Camps in such a dramatic fashion that the episode has been banned from public viewing.

Through the years, there has been much speculation about the existence of FEMA Camps and their true purpose. Recent events surrounding the recent Ebola crisis, is making it clear that the camps, as well as other co-opted public facilities (e.g. stadiums, malls, etc.) will be used to enforce medical martial law for both the sick as well as anyone else who the government determines is a (health) risk to the well-being of the public. Am I saying that the camps will be used to house political dissidents. This is undeniably true. This article traces the inception of FEMA camps to the present and intended purpose. This article will also expose the fact that it will not just be Ebola victims going to these camps where there will be medical facilities.

REX 84

REX 84 is the “granddaddy” of the modern era FEMA camp legislation. When the REX 84 FEMA Camp program was created by people such as Lt. Col. Oliver North, who was both National Security Council White House Aide, and NSC liaison to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and John Brinkerhoff, the deputy director of “national preparedness” programs for FEMA’s role in the creation of the camps, our ultimate fate for future generations of Americans was sealed.

The existence of the Rex 84 plan was first revealed during the Iran-Contra Hearings in 1987, and subsequently reported by the Miami Herald on July 5, 1987.

” These camps are to be operated by FEMA should martial law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general’s signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached.”

The (FEMA) camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners.

Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold thousands of  people”.

The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA. Since 1987 we have had an estimated 25-30 illegal aliens enter the United States and these camps were not used for “rounding up the mass exodus” of illegal aliens, nor, is this article suggesting that is what should have happened. The point being, the government is lying about the existence of these camps, despite irrefutable legislative proof. Not one illegal alien was sent to a FEMA camp in the recent Central American exodus this past summer, NOT ONE!

Some observers believe that as many as 4 million may have illegally crossed the border since the beginning of this year. Regardless, the stable of 800 existing FEMA camps remain untouched.

Why Aren’t 800 FEMA Camps Enough?

 

Operation Mountain Guardian was a disaster drill and a Continuity of Government exercise.

Operation Mountain Guardian was a disaster drill and a Continuity of Government exercise.

 

On September 23, 2011, the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA conducted a disaster drill in Denver, Colorado that they called Operation Mountain Guardian. The plan was all-inclusive and basically shut down the Denver metropolitan area including Denver International Airport, many malls, many schools and several other public venues including Sports Authority Field where the Denver Broncos play professional football. Why didn’t this event put people in the streets by the tens of thousands? To rub salt in the wound a similar drill was conducted at Giants Stadium in New York in the same year.

 

 

Got Freedom?

Got Freedom?

 

In September of 2011, Simon Properties, the largest owners of malls in North America inked a deal with DHS to allow their malls to be used as detention centers in times of “national emergency”.

Malls, the "new" FEMA camps.

Malls, the “new” FEMA camps.

 

 CBS News Admitted FEMA Camps Are Real

Did you know that during Hurricane Sandy, CBS actually admitted to the existence of FEMA camps? I was able to obtain documents and photos which can be accessed in an article entitled CBS News Admits FEMA Camps Are Real. The article also details how the FEMA has privately contracted with vendors who can erect temporary FEMA camps withing 24-72 hours as original authentic FEMA/KBR  communications were revealed. 

Your soon to be new accommodations are described in this PDF attachment, published by the Army (FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF). This document tells you that  This is what a typical American FEMA camp looks like. The camps will eventually be run for foreign assets, presumably UN troops.  Internment can occur for a variety of reasons including the stripping of one’s citizenship for political views which can get one to be declared to be a “sovereign citizen”. Medical incarceration would also be a reason that could land Americans into these camps. This document is less than a year old.

Medical Martial Law and HHS Run FEMA Camps

Recently, more attention has been brought to the subject of FEMA camps in the context of the present Ebola scare.

 

fema camp workers

Whether you know it or not, your future reservations remain untouched by the most recent immigration crisis. Soon it will be time to go on the vacation of your life. And this is one of the ways that you will get there.

The Legal Authority to Send “SUSPECTED” Ebola Patients to FEMA Camps and Anyone Suspected of Having Been Exposed!

Before one can “legally” transport Ebola patients to “death camps” and await the inevitable, the public must be reassured that the rule of law is being followed.

When Ebola strikes, the changes in the handling of Ebola patients have already been planned for through a series of legal actions, most of them are Executive Orders. For example, the Executive Order, entitled Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, amends Executive Order 13295, passed by George W. Bush in April 2003, which allows for the, “apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals”, and Ebola is specifically mentioned. Obama’s executive order, entitled, Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, amends Bush’s Executive Order 13295, which allows for the, “apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals  to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases.”

Obama has granted his administration the authority to detain, in any manner deemed necessary, any person who demonstrates any degree of respiratory distress. This means people with noninfectious asthma could be detained.

The CDC has greatly expanded guidelines which permit the government to quarantine people with “fatigue” and lists this as a potential Ebola symptom. Anyone THOUGHT to be exposed to an Ebola patient can be quarantined. CDC has opened themselves up to the likelihood that Ebola can be transmitted even from people who are not presently symptomatic at the time of transmission. This goes hand in hand with present CDC measures that allow for the quarantine of non-symptomatic persons.

Medical Martial Law FEMA Camps to Be Run By HHS

In the event of a pandemic, the Secretary of Human Health Services (HHS) will assume operational control of Federal emergency public health and medical response.

“Ambulance” Contracts Will Deport Americans to FEMA Camps

I have found evidence supporting these claims in a federal document entitled  Emergency Support Function #8 (ESF #8) – Public Health and Medical Services Annex.  

This document can be accessed by Googling “ESF #8″ and you will arrive at the following listing and a PDF will appear.

[PDF]Emergency Support Function #8 – Public Health and Medical

http://www.fema.gov/…/emergency_s…

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Medical Services include responding to medical needs associated with mental health, ….. assistance are executed by ESF #8 in coordination with DHS/FEMA. … primarily for communications, aircraft, and the establishment of base camps.

ESF #8 established the national ambulance contract, which is designed to provide support forevacuating seriously ill or injured patients.

HHS will enlist the VA and Department of Defense assets (e.g. the military) in support of providing “transportation assets, operating and staffing NDMS Federal Coordination Centers, and processing and tracking patient movements from collection points to their final destination reception facilities (emphasis added).

The Ebola Detainment Centers (FEMA Camps) Have No Real Medical Facilities

Look at the participating partners in the “hospital” detainment centers in the EFS #8 document. This list is very revealing as to the intended purpose of these camps.

 Support Agencies:

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of State

Department of Transportation

Department of Veterans Affairs

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Postal Service

American Red Cross

 

Sometimes, it is not what a person says that is important, it is what they do not say. In the above list of Ebola detainment centers, I don’t see the CDC or the National Institute of Health listed. Nor do I see any legitimate medical organizations. I don’t even see the presence of any “volunteer” medical organizations such as Doctors Without Borders. Does anyone else find it disturbing that the transport of very sick people will be conducted and the end point is devoid of any medical treatment organizations and/or facilities?

These camps are death camps. There is not one shred of evidence that these camps are intended to treat or even make comfortable people who will contract Ebola or be exposed to Ebola. The most disturbing thing is that these camps will be death camps for relatively healthy people. If you are a person who is unlucky enough to be discovered to have asthma or merely be temporarily suffering from congestion in one’s lungs from allergies or a simple cold, you could find yourself on one of the Federally approved ambulance services (bus, train, plane) and headed to your final destination.

Conclusion

I cannot shake a story that the late Larry Grathwohl told me regarding a conversation he had with Bill Ayers. Larry’s conversation took with Ayers while he was serving as a FBI special informant sent to investigate Ayers organization, the Weatherman Underground. Ayers is talso he man who launched President Obama’s political career from the living room of his Chicago area home.

Grathwohl revealed, on my talk show,  that he asked Ayers, the then leader of the radical group the Weathermen Underground, in a meeting of about 25 well-to do fellow Weatherman, most with advanced degrees from Ivy League Universities, what the Weathermen planned to do when they achieved their goal of a communist take over the government.  Grathwohl stated that Ayers paused for a moment and then said that it was likely that about 50 million Americans will have to be re-educated in concentration camps located in the American Southwest and that about 25 million would have to be eliminated, meaning that they would have to be murdered.  The potential implications are stunning.

To this day, two years later, and even after Larry’s passing, these words still haunt me.

The Common Sense Show

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

Activist Post
By Daisy Luther

texasfingerprint

(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

More Media Foreshadowing of Massive False Flag Attack in U.S.

The Daily Sheeple
by Amanda Warren

dhs increases security

To see the recent mainstream media headlines, one who ponders a little deeply might rightly think we are on the precipice of something strange. More Ebola funny business, shootings, a rocket explosion, and the Department of Homeland Security’s recent raising of security levels at all federal buildings within the United States.

Just like the months leading up to 9/11, the American public is being assaulted with an onslaught of reports suggesting the possibility of another major terror attack inside the United States. Are we being invited into a terror theater? A little predictive programming perhaps? A couple news pieces should offer some pause, if nothing else.

In this Fox News report about the DHS raising security levels, favored mouthpiece and former New York mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, speaks about expecting attacks. Certainly, his words were meant to unsettle the public, rather than reassure. According to him, we have to assume a major attack is imminent. His words really need no introduction, but deserve some analysis, which can be left up to the readers.

From Fox:
A former intelligence official also likened Tuesday night’s press release to “terror theater,” though said it is a good thing to keep the public aware of these threats.

To actually read the report, however, the major bent of the message surrounds domestic terrorist threats. Strangely, it’s the same reconciliation of foreign terrorism juxtaposed with domestic played out in the series Jericho (2006) – a show about the aftermath of nuclear attacks in the States, where factions within U.S. government set off a nuke false flag, blamed on foreign/domestic combined terrorism.

Again from Fox:

“ISIS is waging a campaign of war over the Internet to incite homegrown violent extremism in the United States,” McCaul, R-Texas, said. “We must do everything we can to protect every American abroad and at home.” [emphasis added]

This “marriage” or mirage was also explored in Brandon Turbeville’s pieces, “FBI Visiting Gun Shops to Investigate “People talking about Big Government’” and “11 Signs of a False Flag.”

Additionally, one of those false flag signs is conducting terror drills before or during an actual event. So, it is all too discomforting that last month, Nebraska scheduled simulated nuclear explosion drills. As Webster Tarpley writes in his book 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made In USA, at least 46 drills were underway in the months leading up to 9/11 and on the morning of the attack.

Like Turbeville, I’m not attempting to predict anything myself or say that it’s certain to occur, but simply pointing out that the recent media talking points and imagery could be signaling such a catastrophe to the masses, whether it would occur or not.

In July, Turbeville wrote in “Media Propaganda Foreshadows Massive False Flag Inside The United States:”

The narrative being inserted into news media reports and government statements no longer revolves around terrorists hijacking planes or blowing up specific buildings. This time, the narrative is that there is the very real possibility that terrorists who have traveled to Syria and Iraq in order to overthrow the governments in those countries are now traveling back to the United States and Europe with the intention of launching terror attacks at home.

Of course, ever since 9/11, Americans have been relentlessly bombarded with the prospect of more and greater terrorist attacks taking place at home and abroad, even while the U.S. government openly funds the very terrorists it uses to keep the public frightened into submission.

What was some of the predictive programming he noticed?

  • The article written by Andrew G. Doran for the National Review, published on June 16, 2014 entitled “ISIS In The Homeland,” where Doran argues that not only do ISIS and ISIS-style fighters have American and European passports, but that these terrorists are already back home.
  • Recent (and eerily specific) advice from former Vice President Dick Cheney: “I think there will be another attack and the next time I think it’s likely to be far deadlier than the last one…You can just imagine what would happen if somebody could smuggle a nuclear device, put it in a shipping container, and drive it down the beltway outside Washington D.C.” (Again, it’s hard not to think back to Jericho, especially if you view Cheney’s whole conversation about reconstituting the U.S. government after hypothetical attack.)
  • Another Cheney gem: “One of the things I worried about 12 years ago and that I worry about today is that there will be another 9/11 attack and that the next time, it’ll be with weapons far deadlier than airline tickets and box cutters.”
  • In September, 2013, as the rush to war with Syria was ramping up, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham suggested that, if the U.S. did not use military force against Syria, the Iranians would view America as weak and, eventually, nuclear weapons could end up in the hands of terrorists resulting in the bombing of Charleston Harbor.
  • Another Graham quote: “I believe that if we get Syria wrong, within six months, and you can quote me on this, there will be a war between Iran and Israel over their nuclear program. My fear is that it won’t come to America on top of a missile, it’ll come in the belly of a ship in the Charleston or New York harbor.”

Not only is that as eerily specific and similar to Cheney’s quotes, but Giuliani has echoed Graham’s frustration that we just didn’t “get things right” with the handling of propagated security threats stemming from the middle east and then he drives the idea of it being “here at home.” And the news anchor chimes in, in reference to Canadian and U.S. events, that “we have no program, no plan, in place to tip off our intelligence, folks, to that kind of behavior.”

To this writer, the symbolism underlying NASA’s unmanned Antares rocket explosion in the same 24 hours was not lost, but you can make of that what you will.

2014-10-29_1404

2014-10-29_1408

I also couldn’t help notice that “tares” are a type of false wheat that often show up at harvest. Harvest that could also be called “homegrown.”

Regardless of actual future events, the idea of a large-scale attack is certainly being pumped out in the media – subconsciously and consciously – with complete abandon and in full bloom.

The Daily Sheeple

Former Pro-GMO Biotech Scientist Admits GMOs Aren’t Safe, Refutes Claims by Monsanto

Natural Society
by Christina Sarich

gmo field storm scientist 263x164 Former Pro GMO Biotech Scientist Admits GMOs Arent Safe, Refutes Claims by MonsantoFor how long will we need to go back and forth in this GMO battle before a sound conclusion is finally met? If you have been following the GMO debate at all, you probably realize that this issue will likely never rest, as numerous studies on both sides of the spectrum (one side showing safety and the other showing danger) will continue to surface. What’s more, this research as well as opinions will be born out of lies or false substantiation. You’ve likely read headlines like these lately and scoffed:

  • 2000+ Reasons Why GMOs Are Safe To Eat And Environmentally Sustainable
  • GMO Opponents Are the Climate Skeptics of the Left
  • Study of 1 Billion Animals Finds GMOs Safe

Or how about comments like this one:

“I used to think that nothing rivaled the misinformation spewed by climate change skeptics and spinmeisters.

Then I started paying attention to how anti-GMO campaigners have distorted the science on genetically modified foods. You might be surprised at how successful they’ve been and who has helped them pull it off.”

Or if you trust one of the most hated companies on the planet, you can go straight to Monsanto’s site and read: An Overview of the Safety and Advantages of GM Foods.

Monsanto openly admits “after 30” whole “years of research” that they are convinced GMOs are safe. Just one type of pine tree lives more than 5000 years, but yea – Monsanto has all of Mother Nature figured out in its 30 years of tinkering with genes.

It’s amazing how many people have been boondoggled by biotech or are simply paid shills to keep the misinformation train choo-chooing along.

Former Biotech Scientist Speaks Out

In comes Dr. Thierry Vrain, a former GMO biotechnologist who has come out with a lot of information that should open people’s eyes about the real dangers of genetically modified foods and crops.

Vrain will be the first to admit that Monsanto has conducted a lot of studies showing that GMOs are safe, but he changed his own tune about ten years ago when he started reading scientific journals from other countries.

Vrain explains:

“I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.”

Vrain was so much a supporter of GMOs (as well as a former biotech scientist for Agriculture Canada) that he used to conduct tours and tell large groups of people all about the greatness of genetically altered crops – but not anymore. Here is what he thinks about his former industry now:

“I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.

There are a number of scientific studies that have been done for Monsanto by universities in the U.S., Canada, and abroad. Most of these studies are concerned with the field performance of the engineered crops, and of course they find GMOs safe for the environment and therefore safe to eat.”

Vrain thinks the public is being swindled. He believes we should all demand that government agencies replicate tests showing that GMOs are safe rather than rely on studies paid for by the biotech companies. He continues:

“The Bt corn and soya plants that are now everywhere in our environment are registered as insecticides. But are these insecticidal plants regulated and have their proteins been tested for safety? Not by the federal departments in charge of food safety, not in Canada and not in the U.S.

There are no long-term feeding studies performed in these countries to demonstrate the claims that engineered corn and soya are safe. All we have are scientific studies out of Europe and Russia, showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely.

These studies show that proteins produced by engineered plants are different than what they should be. Inserting a gene in a genome using this technology can and does result in damaged proteins. The scientific literature is full of studies showing that engineered corn and soya contain toxic or allergenic proteins.”

This science is actually only about 40 years old. It is all based on a theory of genetic manipulation hypothesized around 70 years ago – of the ONE GENE – meaning that each gene codes for one single protein. The Human Genome project proved this totally wrong.

Most scientists now understand that any gene can give more than one protein and that inserting a gene anywhere in a plant eventually creates rogue proteins. Some of these proteins are obviously allergenic or toxic, like Cry proteins found in GMO corn. Otherwise known as Bt toxins (Bacillus thuringiensis), Cry proteins are one of biotech’s answers for ‘safe’ food.

That’s odd; one study found them absolutely toxic for mammalian blood. Dr. Mezzomo says that Cry toxins are deathly for mice. Another study linked them to a higher rate of leukemia. Yet another study conducted at Sherbrooke University Hospital in Quebec found corn’s Bt-toxin in the blood of pregnant women and their babies, as well as in non-pregnant women. These same toxins are also associated with higher levels of inflammation in the body, allergies, MS, and cancer.

Furthermore, what ridiculous egocentricity for biotech scientists to think they can crack the code of life when there are still acres and acres of rainforest that contain medicinal herbs that they have never even studied or recognized. Every square mile lost in these forests represents a possible cancer soution or super-food source.

Why the heck do we need GMOs? We haven’t even utilized the plethora of foods and herbs Mother Nature has already provided us with, if only we would steward them sustainably. There seems to be a new wonder-extract being discovered every few days, despite our pillaging.

Additionally, Vrain once answered honestly to this question in an interview:

“Q: It is astounding that people don’t question the very idea of altering DNA. When Monsanto or others claim a genetically modified organism is “substantially equivalent” to the conventional plant, it’s illogical to me because when DNA is altered, the plant is altered. It’s not the same and it’s certainly not natural.

A: That depends on your view of the world. As a scientist, when you add a bacteria gene to a plant, or a plant gene to a fish, or a human gene to corn, or 10,000 acres of corn growing insulin – they consider it progress. So if a tomato plant has a bacterial gene, it still looks very much like a tomato plant. You couldn’t tell very much from the taste of the tomato so there is something easy about believing in “substantial equivalence” . . . but Roundup (Monsanto’s herbicide) is a chelator; it holds manganese, magnesium and a few other minerals. It holds the minerals and doesn’t let go so basically it starves the plant. It probably also starves many other creatures in the soil.” 

New evidence shows that these same important minerals are chelated from humans that eat RoundUp GMOs.

Vrain has based his research on over 500 government reports and scientific articles published in peer-reviewed journals, some of them with the highest recognition in the world.

Now tell me – how exactly are GMOs safe?

If a soil biologist and scientist of genetic engineering of 30 years revisits his stance on GMOs – shouldn’t those who are still clinging to biotech efficacy relent? We need more GMO whistleblowers like himself. I hope they are out there and they come forward – and fast.

Natural Society

The Ebola Covert op: 30 Answers To “who benefits?”

InfoWars
by JON RAPPOPORT

This is not a complete list of benefits from the Ebola op. However, it does cover a significant amount of territory.

ebola
Image Credits: niaid, Flickr

“In any major covert op, there are always multiple objectives and levels of opportunity, and they are not wasted. The interesting thing is, 99.99% of the players who benefit don’t even realize the whole thing is a planned op.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

This is not a complete list of benefits from the Ebola op. However, it does cover a significant amount of territory.

In no particular order:

Distraction: the continuing US war in the Middle East moves to the back pages.

Vaccine and drug sales for pharmaceutical companies expand.

The public is further conditioned to accept all vaccines, follow all medical orders, buy phony epidemics as real, fear germs, fear “unpredictable outbreaks.”

Fear=easier to control.

The public is conditioned to living, cradle-to-grave, under the power of the medical cartel and doctors’ orders.

Mega-corporations and financiers gain more control over the rich resources of West Africa.

The US government establishes a military outpost in West Africa, the purpose of which is to enhance and expand its operations on the African continent. Its main economic competitor in Africa is China.

The CDC and the World Health Organization enhance their influence, justify their budgets, try to appear as the protectors of humanity.

Ebola researchers grab new grant monies, seek promotions, enhanced status, awards.

The diagnostic-testing industry cashes in.

The use of irrelevant, useless, and unreliable diagnostic tests for Ebola sets the stage for future situations in which thousands or even millions of false positive tests invent, out of thin air, so-called epidemics in which viruses actually play no role at all. Just like now.

Irrelevant or non-existent viruses function as cover stories to conceal actual and inconvenient causes of illness, such as industrial pollution, ag pesticides, GMO food, fracking chemicals, radiation, etc.

The medical cartel and its government allies move a step closer to being able to mandate all vaccines for the population, with no exemptions permitted.

The overall toxifying and weakening of populations, through vaccines and drugs, thus moves forward. Weakened=easier to control.

Selective quarantines further establishes unconstitutional government control over the people. A phony epidemic can trigger the wide declaration of martial law.

Under the aegis of “tracking carriers of the virus,” the Surveillance State expands.

Combining the epidemic op with open borders, the government and medical authorities can assert there are now vast numbers of unvaccinated people in the US (immigrants)—and they must be protected, through “herd immunity,” by vaccinating everyone in the US with every conceivable vaccine.

Under the cover of “a global pandemic,” toxic modern medicine can expand its reach into every corner of the globe as a “necessary platform for treating ‘infected populations’.”

The DOD and DHS expand their operations, because “every pandemic is a threat to national security.”

The Globalist view of one world under one controlling management system is enhanced—“every epidemic threatens all of us, we’re all in this together, we need, among other innovations, one coordinated medical system for the whole planet.”

Travel to and from any point in the world can be cut off arbitrarily—more top-down control.

Through declaring “infected zones,” economic attacks can be leveled by isolating and quarantining those zones. Loss of business, loss of money—the IMF and World Bank step in and make draconian deals for loans, in exchange for surrender to mega-corporate control of those territories.

In the wake of “fear of the epidemic,” all national health insurance programs on the planet, including Obamacare, can assert more power over the people—“we’re here to protect you from illness and death, so accept all diagnoses and treatments; no opting out, no resistance…”

Further attacks can be launched at traditional and natural solutions to illness—“how dare people try to treat Ebola with anything except (unproven and toxic) drugs and vaccines.”

Further propaganda covertly characterizes “deepest darkest Africa” as the place where terrible things come from.

“The killer virus” functions as a cover story, concealing the centuries-long campaign to weaken and decimate the populations of Africa through starvation, wars, contaminated water supplies, overcrowding, theft of fertile farm land and other natural resources, toxic vaccine campaigns.

Multiple government agencies (DHS, DOD, CDC, SEC, NIH, CIA, NSA, FBI, etc.) coordinate plans and exercises to “combat a pandemic situation.” These joint plans further collect overall power to control the movements and actions of the population.

Of course, at any given moment, vaccines (which are already a toxic soup of chemicals and germs) can be covertly seeded with other toxic elements, including those which cause sterility and infertility.

Up the road, we will see increased efforts to deliver vaccines and drugs embedded in food products, and sprayed from the air.

The “distraction effect” of Ebola can, of course, divert attention away from many events, stories, and other operations, including: NSA spying, Benghazi, Fast&Furious, the US government alliance with the Sinaloa drug cartel, ISIS, etc.

The “war against the epidemic” is quite similar to the “war against terrorism,” and involves the same loss of privacy and freedom.

And, naturally, the media benefit, because they have a big scary story to cover—their hits and sales improve, their advertisers are happy.

What I call the Reality Manufacturing Company is deeply satisfied; they just invented, out of whole cloth, a new front of fake reality, and untold numbers of people bought it, rather than imagining and inventing their own reality. The day when THAT most profound of all revolutions occurs is shoved further into the future.

This “who benefits” list explains, in part, why I’ve been writing extensively about the phony epidemic called Ebola.

InfoWars

Study: Global One-Child Policy Not Enough for “Sustainability”

The New American
by Alex Newman

one child policy

A team of environmental “scientists” published a new study in a U.S. government-linked journal claiming that even a planetary Communist Chinese-style one-child policy would not be enough to stop alleged “overpopulation” from ravishing the Earth and making humanity “unsustainable.” In fact, according to the Australian researchers, even combined with massive reductions in population via another world war, a global one-child policy would still not be enough to save the planet and the environment from the supposed scourge of mankind. To deal with their reputed “crisis,” the authors propose encouraging — read brainwashing or perhaps even coercing — women to have fewer children while rationing resources for those humans fortunate enough to escape their population-control regime. But even that will not be enough, according to the paper.

Fortunately for the people of the world, the fringe population-control movement lurking behind the study has been making similarly outlandish claims since the Malthusian crackpots of the late 1700s — only to be proven embarrassingly wrong every time. Indeed, the editor of the latest paper on overpopulation, Paul Ehrlich, is perhaps one of the most widely ridiculed contemporary “scientists” on Earth. Thanks to funding from billionaire overpopulation zealots and the U.S. taxpayer, Ehrlich remains on the scene — despite being wrong about virtually everything throughout his career as an advocate of draconian population controls to stave off an imagined overpopulation crisis. He has previously stated that the “optimum number of people” is 1.5 billion to 2 billion. Yet, like every other population-control advocate, he has so far refused to lead by example.

“The planet’s large, growing, and overconsuming [sic] human population, especially the increasing affluent component, is rapidly eroding many of the Earth’s natural ecosystems,” claims the new paper, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of the United States of America. “However, society’s only real policy lever to reduce the human population humanely is to encourage lower per capita fertility.” By lower per capita fertility, the authors mean that each woman should have fewer children. While that may be the only “humane” policy lever, the authors reveal clearly that their “humane” option will not be nearly enough to suit their taste for fewer humans allegedly messing up the “ecosystem” and consuming the elite’s resources.

The paper, entitled “Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems,” also examines various scenarios and potential “interventions” surrounding human population numbers — including mass deaths and drastically decreasing birth rates. Its conclusion, essentially: No matter what population controllers do to slash the population, there will still be too many people to save the planet, so global economic controls are also needed. “Even one-child policies imposed worldwide and catastrophic mortality events would still likely result in 5–10 billion people by 2100,” explains a summary of the paper, with the implicit assumption that 5-10 billion is too many. “Because of this demographic momentum, there are no easy ways to change the broad trends of human population size this century.”

In the abstract for the paper, the authors make similar claims, arguing that the growing population of people “is rapidly eroding Earth’s life-support system.” As such, they claim, there are “more frequent calls” to address the issue by advocating even steeper declines in the number of new people allowed to exist. “Assuming a continuation of current trends in mortality reduction, even a rapid transition to a worldwide one-child policy leads to a population similar to today’s by 2100,” reads the abstract, adding that even a “mass mortality event” killing 2 billion people over five years would still leave 8.5 billion mouths to feed by the end of the century. Especially troubling to the researchers are “human pressures” on the “future ecosystems” of Africa and South Asia. In other words, they believe there are too many Africans and South Asians in particular.

“Humanity’s large demographic momentum means that there are no easy policy levers to change the size of the human population substantially over coming decades, short of extreme and rapid reductions in female fertility; it will take centuries, and the long-term target remains unclear,” the authors claim, operating under the wild assumption that fewer humans is good and more humans is bad. “However, some reduction could be achieved by midcentury and lead to hundreds of millions fewer people to feed. More immediate results for sustainability would emerge from policies and technologies that reverse rising consumption of natural resources.” Hiding behind opaque language, the authors are proposing “policies” — also known as government coercion — to reduce the population, as well as the living standards and consumption levels of those who remain.

The new “study,” published online on October 27, comes as population-control zealots in the Obama administration and at the United Nations have been increasingly coming out of the woodwork. This month, for example, Obama’s new “Ebola Czar,” a lobbyist and attorney, came under fire for a 2008 interview in which he claimed “growing population,” especially in Africa, was the “top leadership challenge” facing the world — not tyranny, genocide, poverty, disease, infant mortality, but the number of people. Obama’s “Science Czar,” John Holdren, has previously proposed forced abortions, sterilization via the water supply, and what he called a “planetary regime” with a “global police force” to control resources and enforce the regime’s population edicts. Like other overpopulation crackpots, however, he has been wrong about virtually everything.

The UN, meanwhile, which recently unveiled a new plot to further slash the number of Africans, just came out with another report advocating global abortion on demand and more population-control measures to promote what it calls “sustainability.” Essentially, the notion of “sustainable development” involves centralizing power over humanity, the environment, and the economy at the global level — all under the guise of ensuring that humanity fits into vague notions of being “sustainable.” Of course, the global outfit has long been at the forefront of the establishment effort to reduce the human population. In recent years, the UN’s population-control agency, known as UNFPA, was even exposed unlawfully using U.S. taxpayer funds to help the Communist Chinese regime enforce its savage one-child policy through forced abortions and sterilization.

The latest call to reduce the population, like the previous ones, is based on multiple false assumptions and premises. One of the 800-pound gorillas behind the new paper reveals a fundamental lack of economic understanding. For instance, if a given nonrenewable resource were indeed becoming scarce, the laws of supply and demand would automatically push the price up. That would lead to increased reliance on substitutes as consumers reduced the quantity they demand. If no good substitutes exist, higher and higher prices for the dwindling resource would drive investment toward discovering one or recovering previously used resources by recycling or other means. When “peak oil” theorists argue that oil will run out, for example, they rarely, if ever, consider the well-documented market forces that would be at work, assuming governments stay out of the way. Perhaps “environmental scientists” and “ecologists” ought to be required to complete Economics 101 prior to obtaining their degrees.

The editor of the paper, Stanford Professor Paul Ehrlich of The Population Bomb infamy, has been making his kooky forecasts for decades. “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people,” he claimed in 1971, back when he and other population-control fanatics such as Obama’s forced-abortions “science” czar were hyping the “global cooling” fraud. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.” On the first UN Earth Day in 1970, meanwhile, Ehrlich claimed that “in ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.” Now he is warning that humans may soon be forced to resort to cannibalism.

The authors of the PNAS study, professors Corey Bradshaw and Barry Brook at the University of Adelaide in Australia, are merely continuing to promote the decades-old, totally discredited and anti-biblical notion that the myth of “overpopulation” represents a threat to “Mother Earth.” Despite no global warming in 18 years, record levels of sea ice, and the failure of every single UN “climate” model, both are also deeply involved in promoting climate hysteria — another favorite tool of would-be population controllers. In reality, though, countless experts have warned that the real crisis facing humanity is that there are not enough births. With the rapidly aging population, mankind may well face a major population problem, but it will be the exact opposite of what Ehrlich and his comrades imagine.

The truth is that after a little more growth in the coming decades, human numbers are set to drastically decline based only on current trends. Right now, the entire population of the world could fit in Texas, with each family having its own home and a yard. The world also produces more than enough food to sustain mankind — the primary reason for the hunger that remains is tyranny and oppressive government, not a lack of resources. Even though population pseudo-scientists and neo-Malthusian crackpots are becoming increasingly discredited with the failure of their hysterical predictions, they still maintain a great deal of power in governments and international organizations around the globe. Considering their horrifying past proposals and embarrassing track records, however, they ought to be laughed out of their taxpayer-funded jobs.

The New American

9/11 Was NATO’s License to Expand Globally

Strategic Culture
by Wayne MADSEN

The 9/11 attacks on the United States undoubtedly benefited a number of actors, including the American military-intelligence complex, Israel, and most definitely, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The Cold War-era, the area of responsibility for which had long been confined to Europe and North America, used the provisions of Article 5 of the NATO Charter – which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all – to extend NATO’s power deep into Eurasia, particularly in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kyrgyzstan.

After engaging in out-of-area invasions and occupations of Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, and Syria and, again in Iraq, against the «Islamic State,» the «North Atlantic» military bloc has transformed itself from a Cold War defensive alliance into a global offensive axis of nations that acts with or without United Nations authorization.

NATO has also become an instrument of neo-colonialism. Under its umbrella or the European Union, NATO established quasi-colonial governments in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, South Sudan, and Libya, as well as a Syrian government-in-exile in Turkey. Political advisers from NATO nations have acted as virtual viceroys, exercising veto authority over the governments installed with Western military might. 

The first nation to come under NATO occupation was Bosnia-Herzegovina, created from the ashes of the former Yugoslavia. After NATO’s «Stabilization Force» (SFOR) was dissolved, the European Force (EUFOR) was created. EUFOR’s «OPERATION ALTHEA» authorizes 1600 troops from mostly NATO nations, including France, Italy, Turkey, and Germany, to occupy Bosnia-Herzegovina. EUFOR’s main base is at Camp Butmir, a former Yugoslav air base outside of Sarajevo. Additional troops can be deployed to Bosnia-Herzegovina from NATO’s Kosovo Force (KFOR) in neighboring Kosovo, carved by NATO out of Serbia. Camp Butmir also permits troops from non-NATO members of the EU, particularly Austria, Finland, Ireland, and Sweden, to interface with NATO troops assigned to the base.

EUFOR is also supplemented by a European Police Mission (EUPM), comprising police forces from mostly NATO nations. The European Union Special Representative (EUSR) acts as a political viceroy with effective control over the government in Sarajevo. 

NATO exercises political and military control over Kosovo through NATO’s KFOR, which is based at Camp Film City in Pristina, the capital of Kosovo, a nation which remains unrecognized by UN Security permanent members Russia and China. While most NATO nations are opposed to UN membership for Palestine, they wholeheartedly support UN membership for Kosovo, a nation governed by remnants of the Kosovo Liberation Army, once recognized as a terrorist group by the United States and which has been accused of running a number of criminal enterprises, including human organ, narcotics, cigarette, nuclear material, weapons, and stolen automobile smuggling.

KFOR mainly comprises troops from NATO countries Germany, France, the United States, Italy, Poland, Slovenia, Romania, and Turkey. Under NATO KFOR command are troops from Ukraine, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Morocco, Armenia, Finland, and Ireland. There is little doubt that NATO’s integration of non-NATO troops in theaters like Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Libya is an attempt to integrate through the back door the armed forces of neutral and non-European nations, yet another indication of NATO’s global expansion. NATO is on a fast track to becoming a worldwide military force for a de facto one-world, largely unelected, government.

KFOR’s commander reports to the NATO Commander of Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy. KFOR’s political adviser exercises de facto veto authority over the «independent» government of Kosovo. The U.S. Army’s main base in Kosovo is at Camp Bondsteel in Ferizaj. The base, built by former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney’s former company, Kellogg, Brown and Root, is a mini-city complete with American fast-food restaurants like Burger King and Taco Bell, as well as a «Cool Beans Coffee Shop.» In other words, Camp Bondsteel is a virtual U.S. colony in the middle of the Balkans putting on display all of the excesses of America’s «trash culture.»

KFOR troops are engaged in asserting Kosovo control over majority Serbian communes in northern Kosovo and the troops have used «non-lethal» force, including rubber bullets, on Serbs who want to be integrated with Serbia. The plight of the Serbs in northern Kosovo in dealing with Kosovo government criminal syndicates in Pristina is just as dire as the fate of Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine who are under threat from neo-Nazi and Ukrainian Jewish oligarch militia forces intent on retaliatory carnage and ethnic cleansing in the Donbass region. NATO has adopted the recalcitrant regimes in Pristina and Kiev as virtual vanguards against Serbia and Russia, respectively.

Although NATO’s presence in Iraq ended with the withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces in 2011, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, housed in America’s largest embassy, continues to play a major political role in Iraq. The most recent example was forcing Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, accused of being too pro-Iranian and an «anti-Semite,» to step down from his office in favor of the more pro-Western Haider al-Abadi. Thousands of U.S. military personnel and contractors continue to be based at the Baghdad embassy and U.S. consulates in Basra, Erbil, and Kirkuk. The advance of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) from Syria into Iraq has permitted NATO to restore its presence in Iraq with U.S., Canadian, British, and French aircraft taking part in offensive operations against ISIL forces in the country. U.S. forces have ordered civilians to evacuate the Herir airport in Iraqi Kurdistan so the facility can be transformed into an airbase for U.S. and NATO forces. U.S. and NATO forces are also using Erbil International Airport as a base from which to launch attacks on ISIL forces.

 

NATO, through the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), maintains de facto control over the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia via the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), which consists mostly of troops from Uganda and Burundi. In addition, the TFG is supported by Ethiopian military forces and CIA operatives. The CIA operates from a secret base at Mogadishu’s Aden Adde International Airport. CIA officers direct the activities of AMISOM’s Ugandan and Burundian forces in Somalia and conduct drone attacks against suspected Islamist guerrillas in the country. The CIA base in Mogadishu also coordinates drone attacks throughout the Horn of Africa and Yemen with other CIA drone facilities in Djibouti, Seychelles, and Oman. 

NATO’s Counter-Piracy Task Force 508 (CTF-508), which, ostensibly, operates in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean to counter Somali-based pirates, is also involved in counter-insurgency operations in Yemen directed against Shi’a Houthi rebels and South Yemen independence restoration forces. Such NATO operations are thinly veiled as «anti-Al Qaeda» operations. However, NATO sees Yemeni instability as a reason for it to turn the country into yet another NATO occupied nation. And NATO and its Pentagon masters have long yearned to turn the Yemeni strategic island of Socotra into an Indian Ocean version of Hawaii, a massive U.S. military base in the region that would dwarf the smaller base at Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory far to the south.

 

The NATO political adviser in Libya, a post pushed by the CIA-backed American Libyan Council, coordinates NATO’s military operations in Libya with Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, and Morocco. NATO’s military training role in Libya is handled by an «advisory team» based in Brussels but which makes frequent visits to Libya. NATO’s outreach to Arab monarchies in the Gulf, Jordan, and Morocco to become de facto «associate members» of NATO are conducted through the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. NATO’s outreach to Jordan and Morocco, as well as Egypt, Israel, Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, and now, Libya, is conducted through the Mediterranean Dialogue.

NATO is also expanding into the Southern Hemisphere. NATO and Colombia have signed a partnership agreement, the first such agreement with a Latin American nation. Colombia reportedly agreed to facilitate the stationing of additional NATO troops in Central America and the Caribbean, including European colonies and ex-colonies such as Aruba, Curacao, Bonaire, St. Maarten, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Belize. NATO controls over 400 islands as «overseas territories» in the Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean alone, many inhabited with several uninhabited, but all of which could be transformed into military bases.

NATO is no longer a European or North Atlantic entity. However, its supporters prefer to retain the bogus acronym in order to mask NATO’s actual intentions of global military domination and occupation.

Strategic Culture

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,080 other followers

%d bloggers like this: