Search Blog Posts

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

If You Are Sick of Surveillance, Safeguard Your Systems

Tuesday, 21 October 2014

Written by  Mitchell Shaw

Thanks to the Snowden leaks, most people don't need to be convinced that data-mining by government agencies and irresponsible corporations is a real problem that threatens our liberties in the digital age.  Fortunately, technology is an equal-opportunity tool. Remember that Snowden was able to keep himself and his communications from prying eyes while making not just one, but a series of revelations to journalists. The technologies he used are used by millions every day. They are easily available and largely free to download. Obviously, addressing all that needs to be done and how to do it is beyond the scope of any one article. This article will give you a good place to begin closing the door on those who would violate your online privacy, but it is up to you to learn more. Do an Internet search for the tools listed here, and you will find a trove of tutorials and YouTube videos to help you along the way. Using these tools may involve an uncomfortable learning curve, but the payoff is worth the effort.

Before addressing those technologies, a look at the nature of “Open-Source” software may be helpful.  In simple terms, open-source software is licensed in such a way that its source code is available for anyone to view, audit, modify, and redistribute. Because the open-source community is so large and diverse, the likelihood of anything nefarious being hidden in the code is at or near zero. Another benefit of open-source software is that where vulnerabilities exist, they are more quickly discovered and patched as a community of thousands of people works to solve problems. That is why viruses, which are such a problem for Windows and, to a lesser degree, Mac, are unheard of for Linux.

Linux is a great alternative to Windows for those seeking a more secure and liberty-friendly "Operating System." Because it is open-source, there are many different “flavors” (called distributions) available.  Two of the most popular distributions are Ubuntu and Fedora. They can be downloaded for free from and A fairly complete list of Linux distributions can be found at

While replacing Windows (or Mac) with Linux is the first step in securing your information, it is by no means sufficient in itself. Encrypting your hard drive should be the next step. Encryption turns the data on your hard drive into an unintelligible string of random characters until the correct password is entered. The protection offered by encrypting your hard drive is only as strong as your password, and though the encryption cannot be broken, a weak password can be broken within minutes using a brute force attack. A good password should be long and include uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols. All encryption is not equal, as we now know that many encryption software companies have been pressured by the NSA to provide backdoors. Because of this and the closed-source nature of many of these programs, you should only use open-source encryption. Luckily, most Linux distributions include encryption as part of the installation process.

Now that you have a secure operating system and an encrypted hard drive, it's time to look at the way you use the Internet. Never put anything on the Internet that you would not want to see on the front page of your newspaper. That applies not just to social media, but also to online backup and storage. As the recent hacking and subsequent leaking of intimate celebrity photos stored on Apple's iCloud service demonstrate, once it leaves your hands, it leaves your control. Regardless of the privacy agreements or security promises of these providers, it is up to you to protect your data. Besides, most social media and online backup and storage companies are more than willing to cooperate with government snooping.  Dropbox recently announced Condoleezza Rice as the newest member of its board. It also keeps backups of files months after you delete them and even after you close your account. One way around this is to encrypt any file you backup or store online. A good tool for this is 7zip, which is available as a free download in most any Linux distribution. Another solution is to switch your online backups to a service that offers “zero knowledge” storage. One such service is SpiderOak, which offers encryption for which only you have the password. They cannot even see your data, not to mention allow anyone else, including government agencies, to see it. If required to turn your data over to a government agency, all they would be able to turn over would be the encrypted files and folders.

E-mail is a very insecure form of communication, as it can be intercepted quite easily. It is like sending a postcard through the mail. Anyone, anywhere along the way that intercepts it can read it. The ultimate solution is to encrypt your e-mail. Open-source GPG e-mail encryption is easily installed and is fairly easy to set up. Once you have it set up and get used to using it, the process is fairly transparent. Soon enough, you will forget you are even doing it, and your e-mail becomes inaccessible to snoopers, government and otherwise. Encourage your friends and family to begin encrypting their e-mails, as well.  The more normal it becomes, the more people will do it and the more privacy we will all have.

As far as browsing the Internet, the bare minimum security would be to use a browser such as Firefox, which can be downloaded for free at It is much more secure than Internet Explorer right out of the box, but there are some things you can do to make it even more secure. Download and install the HTTPS Everywhere plugin. This will force a secure connection on all sites that offer it. It is not perfect, but it is the same level of security/encryption used by banking websites. Disable third-party cookies and set up Flash to only run on sites you approve (a process called whitelisting). Flash is notoriously insecure and should only be used with caution.

For the ultimate security while surfing the web, you want to be completely anonymous. For that, there is Tor, which stands for The Onion Router. This service uses layers (like an onion) of security and encryption, routing your Internet traffic through a series of servers (called nodes) and creating a fake IP address at each point along the way. The result is that, when used properly, Tor creates real Internet anonymity. The websites you visit have no idea who you are and you cannot be tracked. This is the method Snowden used to contact The Guardian and leak the information on NSA spying. Tor is also available as part of a complete Linux distribution called T.A.I.L.S. (The Amnesic Incognito Live System), which runs only from a disc or USB drive. It leaves no trace of having been used and shuts down immediately if the disc or USB drive is removed.

Mobile devices are becoming easier to secure, as well. For many Android devices there are several after-market versions of Android available for those willing to root their devices. Cyanogenmod is perhaps the most popular and certainly one of the most secure. It is free to download at There are risks to rooting your device, however,  and if it is not done correctly, it can make the device unusable. In the security settings of all Android devices there is the option of full encryption. For encrypted phone calls and texts on Android, there are applications available. TextSecure and RedPhone, both by Whisper Systems, are two of the best. Apple has claimed that new iPhones are able to be encrypted in a way that puts total control in the hands of the user. Since their software is closed-source, then believing this claim is a matter of trust, and Apple does not have the best record for being trustworthy. There are applications that claim to provide encrypted calls and texts for iPhone, as well, such as Babel, iCrypter, and CoverMe. Again, it's a matter of trust as to whether these tools are effective. There is one open-source solution for encrypted calls on iPhones. It is Signal, by Whisper Systems, the developers of TextSecure and RedPhone for Android.

There are many more tools available, but if you use those listed here properly, you will go a long way toward making yourself much harder for the NSA or irresponsible corporations to track and monitor. Unless you are a specific target, the tools outlined here are probably sufficient to shut the door in their faces and regain your privacy and security.

via TNA

How the Local Police State is Caused by the Federal Government

With the sight of cops in Ferguson, Missouri and Boston resembling totalitarian warriors out of a stereotypical dystopian novel, many Americans have become alarmed at the apparent transition of law enforcement to a role as an occupation force.

They also wonder where the police got the money to pay for it.

According the Center for Investigative Reporting, the answer is that most of it comes from the federal government. In the past decade alone, police departments throughout the country have received a total of $34 billion in federal grants.

Police getting new toys on the fed’s taxpayer’s dime is nothing new. Ever since the War on Drugs was declared in the 1970s, the feds have offered equipment and resources to local law enforcement agencies to help enforce their unconstitutional laws.

SWAT-team methods converged with the drug war.

Enter the SWAT teams, once a rare sight, usually in an urban city rife with crime or civil unrest, now a staple in every community. In 1983, only 13 percent of cities with populations of 25,000-50,000 had a SWAT team. By 2005, it had reached 80 percent.

At the same time, the U.S. saw a massive increase in no-knock raids, from negligible in the early 1970’s to 70,000 in 2010. The current rate is about 150 such raids every day.

The War on Terror has only increased the flow of money, with billions of dollars since 9/11 going from the feds to local police in the form of Homeland Security grants. In 2011, the Pentagon gave away $500 million as part of a program for improving law enforcement capabilities.

Mind you, this was just one program.

DHS grants allow police in small rural towns, with virtually no crime, to obtain equipment, weapons, and vehicles more fitting for a battlefield than Main Street.

In Fargo, N.D., the police received a $256,643 armored truck with a rotating turret, kevlar helmets and assault rifles they carry with them as they patrol the streets in their squad cars.

The rationale? They needed to be prepared for a terrorist attack. Operating from a “what-if?” premise, police inevitably seek out more advanced vehicles, weaponry, and gear for what they perceive as a necessity to respond to any potential attack, no matter how unlikely it is to occur.

In fact, most of the equipment goes unused. When it is, it’s used for incidents for which they are totally unnecessary, such as a raid on an Amish farmer’s property by a SWAT team from the Food and Drug Administration property for the seemingly horrendous crime of selling raw milk.

These grants are also used to carry out surveillance. Earlier this year, the Santa Monica Police Department received nearly $800,000 from DHS to purchase an automated license plate reading system and equipment in the event of an urban riot.

Most disturbingly, the police are using the equipment to target political dissidents. Last year, Concord, N.H. police filed an application to DHS asking for over $250,000 to purchase a BearCat, an armored personnel carrier. What made it all the more disturbing was the police chief’s motives, claiming they needed it due to the perceived threat of “domestic terrorists” such as the Free State Project and Constitutionalists. Though the DHS approved the application, application was withdrawn after it was published and public outrage grew.

Then there’s the growing use of StingRays, a phone tracker that tricks a cell tower into providing information about a cell phone user. This, too, is paid for mostly by DHS grant money.

While many Americans see police militarization as a local problem, it is merely a symptom. A combination of unconstitutional laws, flawed foreign policy, and corrupt use of taxpayer dollars is the real root-cause.

While the police departments are to blame for their individual actions, one has to ask what would occur if they stopped receiving these billions of dollars from the feds. Left to local resources, the police would be at the mercy of the taxpayers who suffer the consequences when they get out of line. 

People ultimately obey those who pay them, and as long as it’s the feds funding the police, we can’t expect them to listen to us.

If we are to stop the militarization, then we have to cut off the flow of funds enabling them to amass such power. This will only happen when the money spigot in D.C. is turned off. And that will only happen when state and local governments twist the handle.

via 10thACenter

Where have the Rothschilds Disappeared to?

Uploaded on Jan 12, 2012
David Icke reveals some facts about Rothschild Zionism in America and around the world.

The Bilzerian Report (News Commentary):

Voting Fraud Uncovered in at least one Illinois County! - Other States Suspect!

...and from the 'Land of Lincoln', too - it all fits!

October 21, 2014

GOP candidate in Cook County, IL discovers voting machine casts his vote for the Democrat he is running against

By Thomas Lifson

The Democrat mantra that voting fraud is rare takes another blow today with the stunning story of a GOP candidate unable to vote for himself in Cook County Illinois. The Illinois Political Review reports:

Admitting his confidence in Cook County ballot integrity is shaken, State Representative Candidate Jim Moynihan (R-56), was shocked today when he tried to cast a vote for himself and the voting machine cast it for his opponent instead.

“While early voting at the Schaumburg Public Library today, I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” said Moynihan. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat."

While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race. It is unknown if the machine in question (#008958) has been removed from service or is still in operation.

Well, they don’t call it Crook County for no reason.

via AmericanThinker

US War on Iran Takes Bizarre Turn

If you don't find it frightening that your 'conservative' Republican Party has done nothing for decades to stop this, or even expose these atrocities, you better sober up for your family's sake, if none other.

Image: Logo of the terrorist MEK, backed 
for years by the US as part of a covert war 
against Iran. Though greatly diminished by 
joint Iraqi-Iranian security operations, the
terrorist organization still enjoys support 

from the highest levels of Western 
October 19, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - It is not merely hyperbole when it is said the US created terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda or the so-called "Islamic State." It is documented fact. The current conflict in the Middle East may appear to be a chaotic conflagration beyond the control of the United States and its many eager allies, but in reality it is the intentional, engineered creation of regional fronts in a war against Iran and its powerful arc of influence.

It is not Western policy that indirectly spurs the creation and perpetuation of terrorist organizations, but in fact, direct, intentional, unmistakable support.

This support would manifest itself in perhaps the most overt and bizarre declaration of allegiance to terrorism to date, US Army General Hugh Shelton on stage before terrorists of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) and their Wahabist counterparts fighting in Syria, hysterically pledging American material, political, and strategic backing. MEK was listed for years by the US State Department as a foreign terrorist organization, but has received funding, arms, and safe haven by the United States for almost as long.

General Hugh's speech titled, "Making Iranian mullahs fear, the MEK, come true," was most likely never meant to be seen or fully understood by Americans. In titled alone, it is clear that US foreign policy intends to use the tool of terrorism to exact concessions from Tehran. If the true nature of America's support for terrorist organizations like MEK were more widely known, the current narrative driving US intervention in Iraq and Syria would crumble.
Image: MEK is just one of many terrorist organizations, that despite being listed by the US State Department as such, still receives weapons, training, cash, and political support from the US government. This is a pattern seen repeated in Libya and most recently in Syria - each case spun and excused with a myriad of lies wrapped in false, constantly shifting narratives.

MEK Has Killed US Servicemen, Contractors, and Iranian Civilians For Decades

MEK has carried out decades of brutal terrorist attacks, assassinations, and espionage against the Iranian government and its people, as well as targeting Americans including the attempted kidnapping of US Ambassador Douglas MacArthur II, the attempted assassination of USAF Brigadier General Harold Price, the successful assassination of Lieutenant Colonel Louis Lee Hawkins, the double assassinations of Colonel Paul Shaffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, and the successful ambush and killing of American Rockwell International employees William Cottrell, Donald Smith, and Robert Krongard.

Admissions to the deaths of the Rockwell International employees can be found within a report written by former US State Department and Department of Defense official Lincoln Bloomfield Jr. on behalf of the lobbying firm Akin Gump in an attempt to dismiss concerns over MEK's violent past and how it connects to its current campaign of armed terror - a testament to the depths of depravity from which Washington and London lobbyists operate.

To this day MEK terrorists have been carrying out attacks inside of Iran killing political opponents, attacking civilian targets, as well as carrying out the US-Israeli program of targeting and assassinating Iranian scientists. MEK terrorists are also suspected of handling patsies in recent false flag operations carried out in India, Georgia, and Thailand, which have been ham-handedly blamed on the Iranian government by the United States and Israel.

MEK is described by Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Ray Takeyh as a "cult-like organization" with "totalitarian tendencies." While Takeyh fails to expand on what he meant by "cult-like" and "totalitarian," an interview with US State Department-run Radio Free Europe-Radio Liberty reported that a MEK Camp Ashraf escapee claimed the terrorist organization bans marriage, using radios, the Internet, and holds many members against their will with the threat of death if ever they are caught attempting to escape.

US Has Been Eagerly Supporting MEK Terrorists For Years

Besides providing MEK terrorists with now two former US military bases in Iraq as safe havens, the US has conspired to arm, fund, and back MEK for years in a proxy war against Iran.

Covert support for the US-listed terrorist group Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK) has been ongoing since at least 2008 under the Bush administration, when Seymour Hersh's 2008 New Yorker article "Preparing the Battlefield," reported that not only had MEK been considered for their role as a possible proxy, but that the US had already begun arming and financing them to wage war inside Iran:

The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds, the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K. coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to its bank accounts—and yet it is almost useless for the purposes the Administration intends.
Image: MEK terrorists have been given safe haven by the US at Camp Ashraf
and then former US military base, Camp Liberty. 
Seymore Hersh in an NPR interview, also claims that select MEK members have already received trainingin the US.

More recently, the British Daily Mail published a stunning admission by "US officials" that Israel is currently funding, training, arming, and working directly with MEK. The Daily Mail article states:

U.S. officials confirmed today that Israel has been funding and training Iranian dissidents to assassinate nuclear scientists involved in Iran's nuclear program. Washington insiders confirmed there is a close relationship between Mossad and MEK.

Christian Evangelicals increasingly support Palestinian human rights

Palestinian Christians
Alison Weir Counterpunch
September 29, 2014

An article in Middle East Quarterly, a pro-Israel publication, reports that support for Israel is eroding among American evangelical Christians, with only 30 percent in a recent survey stating support for Israel above Palestinians.

This trend is even more pronounced among youth, according to an article by David Brog, Jewish-American executive director of Christians United For Israel (CUFI), a major pro-Israel organization. Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu has called CUFI “a vital part of Israel’s national security” and columnist Charles Kauthammer has said, “I do not know of an organization in the world more important to Israel than CUFI.”

Brog’s article, “The End of Evangelical Support for Israel?” is largely pitched as a wake-up call to Israel partisans who, according to Brog, “must take this threat seriously.” (For more on Brog, see below)

Brog quotes a journalist reporting in 2012 about the “the largest gathering of young evangelical leaders in America,” the Catalyst convention: “In dozens of random conversations, I noted that Millenians … expressed solidarity with the Palestinians and annoyance with Israel. This is a seismic shift in the American church and a serious threat to Israel’s one traditional area of support.”

A decade ago, Brog reports, “As if out of nowhere, a block of fifty to one hundred million friends of Israel were poised to enter the national debate and safeguard the U.S.-Israel relationship for generations to come.”*

Today, however, Brog describes a significant reversal. As more and more evangelicals learn the facts on Israel-Palestine (Brog calls such information an “anti-Israel narrative”) they are dropping their unconditional support for Israel.

While evangelical support for Israel has often been attributed to their theology, Brog’s article indicates that the significant factor in the shift is learning the true situation in Israel-Palestine.

Brog states that there is a precedent for such an about-face. 

While many mainline Protestant churches used to support Israel, he states that today “to the extent the mainline denominations act corporately in connection with the Jewish state, it is to divest from it.”

Similarly, as evangelicals learn more about the issue, Brog reports that “more leaders of this generation are moving toward neutrality in the conflict while others are becoming outspoken critics of Israel.”

Brog writes, “Questioning Christian support for the Jewish state is fast becoming a key way for the millennials to demonstrate their Christian compassion and political independence.”

Today, Brog writes, many of those 18 to 30 are “rebelling against what they perceive as the excessive biblical literalism and political conservatism of their parents. As they strive with a renewed vigor to imitate Jesus’ stand with the oppressed and downtrodden, they want to decide for themselves which party is being oppressed in the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

Brog cites a 2010 Pew survey of evangelical leaders attending the Third Lausanne Congress of World Evangelization that “contained two bombshells. It showed that only a minority of those evangelicals polled sympathized primarily with Israel. And it demonstrated that American evangelical leaders were actually less inclined to support Israel than evangelical leaders in general.” The survey found that 49% of American evangelical leaders sympathize with both sides equally and 13% sympathize primarily with the Palestinians.

Brog also notes that the survey indicated that evangelical support for Israel was “never as universal as was commonly believed.”

Much of the increased awareness of the situation, Brog reports, comes from evangelical experts on the Middle East who are speaking and writing widely on this issue, producing documentaries, organizing trips to the region, and creating conferences to inform Christians on the facts.

In the last few years three documentaries were made by Christians specifically for Christians to inform them on Palestine: With God on Our Side, Little Town of Bethlehem, and The Stones Cry Out. They were created by, respectively, Porter Speakman, a former Youth with a Mission member, Mart Green, chairman of the board of trustees of Oral Roberts University, and Yasmine Perni, an Italian journalist. Brog also names evangelicals such as Jim Wallis, Stephen Sizer, Tony Campolo, Serge Duss and sons Brian and Matt, and Palestinian Christians such as Sami Awad and Naim Ateek as among those educating Christians on Palestine. FINISH READING

Monday, October 20, 2014

What were the Motivations for the 9/11 Attack on the United States? - Answer is Seen Here *vid*

This is a threaded string of short video clips which we urge you to complete, segmented if you must, but it'll get the cobwebs out of your head about the disinfo and deception we've been getting from our power sources!

Uploaded on Sep 11, 2011

See What Dan Rather would NOT READ on 9/11: ISRAEL, the MOTIVE, the WHY of the attacks -- Motive suppressed by the media! Omitting motive of anger at US support of Israel is Media Betrayal. Michael Scheuer (former CIA intelligence officer and CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief 1996-99) points out that our politicians are lying to us about why our lives are being put at risk with regard to the motivation of the terrorists attack the U.S. Why they hate us ISN'T "hatred of our freedoms" but rather hatred of specific foreign policies of the U.S. government which are, in fact, unjust, immoral and illegal. 
The top grievance is anger at the U.S. government's policy of aiding and abetting Israeli crimes.

The 1993 attack was led by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's nephew, Ramzi Yousef. After his capture, the FBI questioned Ramzi Yousef on the flight back from Pakistan about his motivations for bombing the World Trade Center in 1993.
"Yousef said he took no thrill from killing American citizens and felt guilty about the civilian deaths he had caused. But his conscience was overridden by his desire to stop the killing of Arabs by Israeli troops." "Yousef said he "would like it to be different," but only terrible violence could force this kind of abrupt political change. He said that he truly believed his actions had been rational and logical in pursuit of a change in U.S. policy toward Israel. He mentioned NO OTHER motivation during the flight and NO OTHER issue in American foreign policy that concerned him." Steve Coll, Ghost Wars p273 http://representativepress.blogspot.c...

What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't
"Sit Down!" The Power to Silence the Truth about 9/11 Part 2

9/11 Mastermind's Motivation: "By his own account, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel." 9/11 Report See

Bin Laden has said, "We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine . This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel."

IMPERIAL HUBRIS by Michael Scheuer

A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies by James Bamford

Ramzi Yousef sent a letter to the New York Times after the 1993 bombing attack on the WTC, "We declare our responsibility for the explosion on the mentioned building. This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region."

Please subscribe
Join Email list to give extra boost: (People report not seeing their subscriptions so this could help boost views)


The 9/11 Motive Map is an adaptation I made of a diagram showing the areas where debris from American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 fell upon Lower Manhattan during the course of the September 11 terror attacks. Map (NOT this video) licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Original image is a work of a Federal Emergency Management Agency employee, taken or made during the course of an employee's official duties. As works of the U.S. federal government, all FEMA images are in the public domain.
NOTE: Don't copy this video, just share the link with others. You can post the link or embed the link in a video annotation.

"... In the past, that was taken to mean that they would never be a serious collapse threat. While this is usually the case in the completed structures, it is not a guarantee, particularly in the steel-framed high-rise that relies on some type of spray-on or membrane fireproofing to protect the steel. The 1 Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia proved that these can be severe dangers under the wrong set of circumstances." Sept. 1998 SEE VIDEO INFO FOR:

Weaponized Ebola Secretly Created in South Africa in the 1980s to Kill or Sterilize Blacks

Old-Thinker News | October 20, 2014
By Daniel Taylor

“No records are available to confirm that the biological agents were destroyed.”

Confronting Doctor Death from Bob Coen on Vimeo.

Operating out of South Africa during the Apartheid era in the early 1980’s, Dr. Wouter Basson launched a secret bioweapons project called Project Coast. 

The goal of the project was to develop biological and chemical agents that would either kill or sterilize the black population and assassinate political enemies. Among the agents developed were Marburg and Ebola viruses.

Basson is surrounded by cloak and dagger intrigue, as he told Pretoria High court in South Africa that “The local CIA agent in Pretoria threatened me with death on the sidewalk of the American Embassy in Schoeman Street.” 

According to a 2001 article in The New Yorker magazine, the American Embassy in Pretoria was “terribly concerned” that Basson would reveal deep connections between Project Coast and the United States.

In 2013, Basson was found guilty of “unprofessional conduct” by the South African health council.

Bioweapons expert Jeanne Guillemin writes in her book Biological Weapons: From the Invention of State-Sponsored Programs to Contemporary Bioterrorism, “The project‘s growth years were from 1982 to 1987, when it developed a range of biological agents (such as those for anthrax, cholera, and the Marburg and Ebola viruses and for botulinum toxin)…“
Basson’s bioweapons program officially ended in 1994, but there has been no 
 independent verification that the pathogens created were ever destroyed

The order to destroy them went directly to Dr. Basson. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The integrity of the process rested solely on Dr. Basson’s honesty.”

Basson claims to have had contact with western agencies that provided “ideological assistance” to Project Coast. Basson stated in an interview shot for the documentary Anthrax War that he met several times with Dr. David Kelly, the infamous UN weapons inspector in Iraq. Kelly was a top bioweapons expert in the United Kingdom. He was found dead near his home in Oxfordshire in 2003. While the official story claims he committed suicide, medical experts highly doubt this story.

In a 2007 article from the Mail Online, it was reported that a week prior to his death, Dr. Kelly was to be interviewed by MI5 about his ties to Dr. Basson.

Dr. Timothy Stamps, Minister of Health of Zimbabwe, suspected that his country was under biological attack during the time that Basson was operating. Stamps told PBS Frontline in 1998 that “The evidence is very clear that these were not natural events. Whether they were caused by some direct or deliberate inoculation or not, is the question we have to answer.”

Stamps specifically named the Ebola and Marburg viruses as suspect. Stamps thinks that his country was being used as a testing ground for weaponized Ebola.

“I’m talking about anthrax and cholera in particular, but also a couple of viruses that are not endemic to Zimbabwe [such as] the Ebola type virus and, we think also, the Marburg virus. We wonder whether in fact these are not associated with biological warfare against this country during the hostilities… Ebola was along the line of the Zambezi [River], and I suspect that this may have been an experiment to see if a new virus could be used to directly infect people.”

The Ghanaian Times reported in early September on the recent Ebola outbreak, noting connections between Basson and bioweapons research. The article points out that, “…there are two types of scientists in the world: those who are so concerned about the pain and death caused to humans by illness that they will even sacrifice their own lives to try and cure deadly diseases, and those who will use their scientific skill to kill humans on the orders of… government…”

Indeed, these ideas are not new. Plato wrote over 2,000 years ago in his work The Republic that a ruling elite should guide society, “…whose aim will be to preserve the average of population.” He further stated, “There are many other things which they will have to consider, such as the effects of wars and diseases and any similar agencies, in order as far as this is possible to prevent the State from becoming either too large or too small.”

As revealed by The Age, Nobel prize winning Australian microbiologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet secretly urged the Australian government in 1947 to develop bio weapons for use against the “overpopulated countries of South-East Asia.” In a 1947 meeting with the New Weapons and Equipment Development Committee, the group recommended that “the possibilities of an attack on the food supplies of S-E Asia and Indonesia using B.W. agents should be considered by a small study group.”

This information gives us an interesting perspective on the recent unprecedented Ebola outbreak. Is it an organic natural phenomenon? Did this strain of Ebola accidentally escape from a bioweapons lab? Or, was it deliberately released?
via oldthinkernews