Abolishing Cash

August 31,



The Financial Times has published an anonymous article which calls for the abolition of cash in order to give central banks and governments more power.

Entitled The case for retiring another ‘barbarous relic’, the article laments the fact that people are stockpiling cash in anticipation of another economic collapse, a factor which is causing, “a lot of distortion to the economic system.”

“The existence of cash — a bearer instrument with a zero interest rate — limits central banks’ ability to stimulate a depressed economy. The worry is that people will change their deposits for cash if a central bank moves rates into negative territory,” states the article.

Complaining that cash cannot be tracked and traced, the writer argues that its abolition would, “make life easier for a government set on squeezing the informal economy out of existence.”

Abolishing cash would also give governments more power to lift taxes directly from people’s bank accounts, the author argues, noting how “Value added tax, for example, could be automatically levied — and reimbursed — in real time on transactions between liable bank accounts.”

The writer also calls for punishing people who use cash by making users “pay for the privilege of anonymity” so they will, “remain affected by monetary policy.” Dated bank notes would lose their value over time, while people would also be charged by banks for swapping electronic reserves for physical cash and vice versa.


The article echoes an argument made by Kenneth Rogoff, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, who has called for high denomination banks notes such as the €100 and €500 notes to be phased out of existence.

As we previously reported, Rogoff attended a meeting in London earlier this year where he met representatives from the Federal Reserve, the ECB as well as participants from the Swiss and Danish central banks. The issue of banning cash was at the forefront of the agenda.

Last year, Rogoff also called for “abolishing physical currency” in order to stop “tax evasion and illegal activity” as well as preventing people from withdrawing money when interest rates are close to zero.

The agenda to ban cash was also discussed at this year’s secretive Bilderberg Group meeting, which was attended by the Financial Times’ chief economics commentator Martin Wolf.

Former Bank of England economist Jim Leaviss penned an article for the London Telegraph earlier this year in which he said a cashless society would only be achieved by “forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank,” which would be, “monitored, or even directly controlled by the government.”

In the UK, banks are treating the withdrawal of cash in amounts as low as £5,000 as a suspicious activity, while in France, citizens will be banned from making cash payments over €1,000 euros from Tuesday onwards. The withdrawal and deposit of cash over the amount of €1,000 euros will also be subject to ID verification.

“There is no more egregious anti-liberty economic policy imaginable than banning cash,” writes Michael Krieger.

“Of course, if cash were involuntarily “ended,” there would be a surge in demand for physical gold and silver, which would then necessitate a ban on those items. Then the cycle of economic and financial tyranny would be complete, and crawling our way out of it, nearly impossible.”

New author S N Strutt talks about these subjects & much more in great detail and with a lot of NEW INSIGHT in his TIMELY new PARNORMAL book which dovetails with biblical scriptures.
See for yourselves at AMAZON:



There Will Be Pestilences: Why Are So Many Deadly Diseases Breaking Out All Over The Globe Right Now? (Source:


Via The Economic Collapse

Ebola, Marburg, Enterovirus and Chikungunya – these diseases were not even on the radar of most people coming into 2014, but now each one of them is making headline news.

So why is this happening?  Why are so many deadly diseases breaking out all over the world right now?  Is there some kind of a connection, or is the fact that so many horrible diseases are arising all at once just a giant coincidence?

And this could be just the beginning.  For example, there are now more than a million cases of Chikungunya in Central and South America, and authorities are projecting that there will be millions more in 2015.  The number of Ebola cases continues to grow at an exponential rate, and now an even deadlier virus (Marburg) has broken out in Uganda.  We have gone decades without experiencing a major worldwide pandemic, and many people believed that it could never happen in our day and time.  But now we could potentially see several absolutely devastating diseases all racing across the planet at the same time.

On Monday, we got news that the first confirmed case of Ebola transmission in Europe has happened.  A nurse in Spain that had treated a couple of returning Ebola patients has contracted the disease herself

How many people did she spread the virus to before it was correctly diagnosed?

Meanwhile, Ebola continues to rage out of control in West Africa.  It is being reported that Sierra Leone just added 121 new Ebola deaths to the overall death toll in a single day.  If Ebola continues to spread at an exponential rate, it is inevitable that more people will leave West Africa with the virus and take it to other parts of the globe.

In fact, it was being reported on Monday that researchers have concluded that there is “a 50 percent chance” that Ebola could reach the UK by October 24th
I have written extensively about Ebola, but it is certainly not the only virus making headlines right now.

Down in Uganda, a man has just died from a confirmed case of the Marburg Virus.
The Marburg Virus is an absolutely horrible disease, and many consider it to be even more deadly than Ebola.  But the fact that it kills victims so quickly may keep it from spreading as widely as Ebola.

We shall see.

Meanwhile, a disease that sounds very similar to Ebola and Marburg has popped up in Venezuela and doctors down there do not know what it is.
Why aren’t we hearing more about this in the mainstream news?

Here in the United States, enterovirus D-68 has sickened hundreds of children all over the country.  So far cases have been confirmed in 43 different states, several children have been paralyzed by it, and one New Jersey boy has died.
The CDC seems to have no idea how to contain the spread of enterovirus D-68.

So why should we be confident that they will be able to contain the spread of Ebola?

Last but not least, the Chikungunya virus is at pandemic levels all over Central and South America.

We aren’t hearing that much about this disease in the U.S., but at this point more than a million people have already been infected

The good news is that very few people actually die from this disease.

The bad news is that almost everyone that gets it feels like they are dying.

In a previous article, I wrote about the intense suffering that victims go through.  According to Slate, the name of this virus originally “comes from a Makonde word meaning ‘that which bends up,’ referring to the contortions sufferers put themselves through due to intense joint pain.”

Right now, the number of cases of Chikungunya is absolutely exploding.

So why is this happening?

Why are so many absolutely horrible diseases emerging all at once?

Joseph Candel: In Matthew 24:3,7 Jesus said there would be an abundance of plagues and diseases marking the time of His return. Even though these things will become increasingly widespread in the days to come, the Bible also tells us that God can protect and even heal those who trust in Him:

“No evil shall befall you, nor shall any plague come near your dwelling.” (Psalm 91:10)

“But to you who fear My name the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings.” (Malachi 4:2)


The Ebola Hoax!

Introduction from Author of "Out of the Bottomless Pit":-

Here is a fantastic EXPOSE of so many so-called "Plagues" or Modern Epidemics:-


The Ebola hoax: questions, answers, and the false belief in the “One It”

Oct 22 2014 by Jon Rappoport

The Ebola hoax: questions and answers

by Jon Rappoport

October 22, 2014


“The Reality Manufacturing Company doesn’t just sell ‘fake paintings’ that are easy to spot. No. They also sell images that are geared to mesh with people’s deeply held instincts and thereby produce rigid false beliefs. People are sure that if they gave up such beliefs, their world would fall apart and blow away in the wind.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Q: Among intelligent people, what’s the biggest barrier to understanding hoaxes pertaining to viruses?

A: Many people will tell you they see through the lies of consensus reality. They know all about them. But when you bring up a virus, and you say there is no reason to suspect a so-called outbreak is caused by a virus, they back away. They can’t imagine that kind of lie. They can’t conceive that such a lie is being told.

Q: Why?

A: They accept, as fact, what medical authorities tell them on that subject. Some people connect “the killer virus” with what they already know about high-level elites who are out to control and diminish and debilitate populations. So “killer virus” and “spreading destruction” fit that picture. Therefore, they automatically buy “the virus.”

In fact, and this is odd, there are people who categorically reject almost everything doctors and medical authorities tell them—but they choose to accept this one: the virus. They choose to believe that when the authorities say, “We have an outbreak and it’s caused by the Ebola virus,” it must be true. Very strange.

Q: The word “outbreak” is strong.

A: Yes. People, again, automatically, associate it with a virus. Movies play a role there. But when you stop and think about it, “outbreak” just means, if it means anything at all, that a number of people in the same general geo-area have become sick. A toxic chemical, for example, could cause that. A vaccine campaign could cause that.

Q: When a number of people who, say, live together become ill, the assumption is there must be a transmission of a virus from person to person.

A: Right. But that isn’t necessarily the case. It isn’t person A, then person B, then person C—it’s all of them being exposed to the same conditions. For instance, if you had 42 people all living in filth with no hope, no money, no job, and they were also exposed to a toxic chemical, and their bodies were breaking down from starvation, and they all became ill, would you call that “transmission?” Of course not.

Q: Considering US and European and African Ebola patients as a whole, don’t they prove that Ebola is caused by a virus and these patients caught the virus?

A: No. As I’ve demonstrated before, the most widely used diagnostic tests for Ebola (antibody and PCR) are unreliable, useless, and irrelevant. Therefore, to assume these patients have Ebola is unwarranted.

To say a patient has Ebola MEANS he tested positive on a reliable and relevant diagnostic procedure. It doesn’t mean anything else.

Q: What made the US and European Ebola patients sick?

A: That can only be answered by a comprehensive examination done on each patient, by an honest and competent researcher, who can, if necessary, go outside conventional assessments and consider, for example, exposure to toxic chemicals, prior treatment with toxic drugs, and other factors that most doctors ignore. The point is, you don’t discover why somebody became sick or died by saying, “What else could it be? It must be Ebola.” That question and answer reveal a titanic lack of understanding.

Q: You’re saying these US European and US patients, and some health workers, may not have been previously healthy?

A: Right. But why speculate? Why not dig in and find out in each case?

When I was writing AIDS INC., I studied a CDC report on the “first five cases of AIDS,” in Los Angeles hospitals. All five men purportedly had no immune systems left. They were called “previously healthy,” and the conclusion was there must have been a virus that wrecked their immune systems and killed them. This conclusion was widely accepted. The doctors and researchers said, “What else could it be?”

But in reading over the report, I found a number of non-viral reasons. It was easy to see that these men were far from “previously healthy.” For instance, a history of dosing with toxic medical and/or street drugs was a huge red flag. Those drugs are immunosuppressive. The rush to judgment—claiming a virus had killed them—was totally unwarranted.

Q: It’s rather mind boggling to consider that the diagnostic tests for Ebola are irrelevant and useless.

A: Without a reliable diagnostic test, there is no reason to say a person has Ebola. And of course, once an “Ebola” patient is in doctors’ hands, we don’t know what treatments he’s getting. The drugs, some of them experimental, could be highly toxic. Then the patient gets very sick, and the doctors say, “It’s Ebola.”

Q: The link between Ebola patients in West Africa and the Ebola patients in the US and Europe—that’s an important factor, isn’t it?

A: It’s important for one reason. It convinces the public that the so-called viral epidemic is real, it travels, and it is a threat, globally. It’s the capper. It sways people’s minds. But think about it. If, in Africa and the US and Europe, you have the same useless diagnostic tests being run, what do you really have? Assumptions, propaganda, and fear mongering. And you also have a cover story (the virus) for corporate and government and pharmaceutical crimes.

Q: OK. What are the two useless and irrelevant diagnostic tests being done on people, to see whether they have Ebola?

A: Let’s start with the antibody test. Two problems. First, the test is notorious for what’s called “cross-reactions.” That means the test isn’t really registering, in this case, the presence of Ebola virus. It’s registering one of a whole host of other factors. For example, in the past the patient received a vaccine, and that triggers a falsely positive reading now.

Q: What’s the second problem?

A: The antibody test doesn’t say whether a person was sick, is sick, or will get sick. At best, if there are no cross-reactions, it merely says the person had contact with the virus in question. So a positive antibody test for Ebola is far from saying “this person has Ebola disease.” That’s a lie. In fact, before 1985, the general conclusion from positive antibody tests was: this is a good sign; the patient’s immune system contacted the germ and threw it off, defeated it.

Q: What about the PCR test for Ebola?

A: This test is prone to many mistakes, starting with the tiny, tiny sample of material taken from the patient. Is it really genetic material, and is that material really a piece of a virus, or is it just a piece of general and irrelevant debris? The test itself takes that tiny sample and amplifies it millions of times so it can be observed. Assuming it is actually Ebola virus, or a fragment of Ebola virus, there is no indication there is enough of the virus in the patient’s body to make him sick. There have to be millions upon millions of active virus in the patient’s body to begin to say that virus is causing problems. The PCR test says nothing about that. In fact, why was it necessary to do the PCR test at all? If the patient had enough Ebola virus in his body to cause illness, there was no need to search for a tiny fragment of a hoped-for Ebola virus, to start the PCR test. The virus would have been everywhere.

Q: People who use the PCR say it is “quantitative.” In other words, it can not only reveal whether a particular virus is in a person’s body, it can reveal “viral load,” meaning how much of the virus is in the body.

A: Yes, I know what they say. However, the inventor of the PCR, Kary Mullis, puts it succinctly: quantitative PCR is an oxymoron. The test isn’t geared to detect quantity. For an analogy, imagine someone comes into your home and notices you are watching a This Old House rerun. He suddenly infers that 500,000 people are also watching it at this moment.

Q: What are some of the non-virus reasons people in West Africa are dying?

A: First of all, you need to know that these non-virus causes can create the symptoms that are attributed to Ebola. Fever, fatigue, sweating, bleeding, vomiting, diarrhea.

In West Africa, you’re simultaneously looking at severe malnutrition, starvation, massive displacement by war, grinding poverty, lack of basic sanitation, open sewage, overcrowding in living quarters, highly toxic organophosphate pesticides in growing fields and indoors (spraying against mosquitos in homes and clinics—which causes bleeding)), vast overuse of antibiotics (shreds digestive systems and causes hemorrhaging), other toxic unrefrigerated medical drugs, toxic industrial pollution, vaccine campaigns that push immune systems already on the edge over the cliff.

Q: What about the non-virus factors that have made health workers sick and killed them in West Africa?

A: Again, you need to analyze every case uniquely. But health workers are wearing hazmat suits sealed off from the outside, and they’re taking one-and-two hour shifts in those boiling suits, losing an astonishing five liters of body fluid in an hour. Then they come out, take off the suits, rehydrate, douse themselves with toxic disinfectants, and go back in soon for another shift and lose more body fluids. In one case, a doctor stated toxic chlorine was actually inside his haz-mat suit with him while he worked. What I’m describing here could cause anyone to collapse.

If we can believe the scattered reports that many health workers in West Africa are dying at a very, very high rate, then I have to say something is wrong with those reports.

Q: Why?

A: Because if we were talking about a real viral outbreak as the cause, at that rate of death among health workers, the rest of West Africa would be seeing hundreds of thousands of deaths by now. So either the reports of deaths among health workers are false, or if they’re true, somebody or something which is non-viral is killing them. It’s that simple.

Q: What do you have to say about charges that the Ebola virus has been worked on, to weaponize it as an instrument of biowar?

A: People have to realize that, for quite some time, researchers in the US and other countries have been working on many germs, trying to weaponize them. The act of trying is not the same as the act of succeeding. It isn’t a walk in the park. You don’t just get a grant, stick your hand into a pile of viruses and massage them. Biowar researchers are no different from other medical researchers. They inflate their results, they promise breakthroughs, they lie about progress, they say and do anything to keep the research money flowing in their direction.

Let me give you an example from the field of cancer research at the US National Institutes of Health. Forty, fifty years ago, virologists were desperate to prove that a certain class of viruses cause cancer. It was their field. They were working with monkeys. So they radiated the monkeys, they poisoned them with chemicals, they injected them with all sorts of germs that were irrelevant to the specific research at hand. Why did they do all this, and more? Because they wanted to destroy the monkeys’ immune systems and render them as vulnerable as possible. THEN they injected them with the viruses that were supposed to cause cancer. That’s what these “researchers” did. And they called it science. And even then, they failed miserably, and the whole cancer project was shut down.

So when you read an article about possible biowar research on Ebola in West Africa, don’t automatically assume, if it took place, that it was successful.

And again, if people were dosed with “a biowar form of Ebola,” it would be possible to do a straightforward test to see if these people have enough of the virus in their bodies to cause disease. But the workable tests aren’t being done, so claiming all these people are dying of Ebola is a completely and utterly insupportable assertion.

A strong and healthy person’s immune system is remarkably resilient and capable. Saying, “Oh well, I’m sure they designed a virus that can slip past the body’s defense system,” just like that, poof, is simply a random opinion.

Yes, people should continue to research the possibility that Ebola has been weaponized successfully. Again, just remember: “worked on in a lab” doesn’t automatically equal “they succeeded.” And also remember, the “chemical” part of biological-chemical warfare is much, much easier, to do. It’s far more effective and predictable.

Q: You’re saying that the image of a single killer virus infecting people and spreading all over the globe can be an illusion.

A: Of course. In the case of Ebola, the epidemic is completely unproven.

Q: What about the possibility that prior vaccine campaigns in West Africa are the real cause of what’s being called Ebola?

A: As I’ve indicated, when you give standard vaccines to people whose immune systems are already on the verge of collapse, for the reasons I’ve listed above, a vaccine can apply the death blow. But in that case, it’s not just the vaccine. Trying to explain why people are dying in West Africa from just one cause is the wrong approach. They were dying already from the combination of immune-suppressing factors.

Q: There is always the chance that an extra toxic element was added to a vaccine.

A: Yes. And every vaccine that has been given in West Africa in the last ten years should be analyzed very carefully. But don’t expect medical officials to make that happen. It would have to be done independently.

Q: There is a kind of fixation on attributing one cause and one cause only to a situation where people are ill and dying in a given region.

A: That’s part of a larger human tendency, and it’s not a good one. It’s a self-deceiving instinct.

For many centuries, organized religions, constructed by elites bent on control of the masses, have built whole cosmologies on the basis of the “single good cause” vs. “the single evil cause.” It’s worked, too, because people tend to fall in line behind that formulation.

And how many nations have been taken into misery and suffering behind the notion that The One, the great leader, has emerged to rule the people.

If you read the US Constitution and earlier documents based on the idea of individual freedom, you see that The One is firmly rejected. Those documents are all about decentralization of power.

The problem is, not enough people are ready for the decentralized “many”; they prefer to look for, and attach themselves to, The One.

Q: The notion of the single germ-cause illustrates this?

A: It’s yet another case in which people, unthinkingly, attach themselves to The One. They have to have it. They need it, like a drug. They believe it so deeply, they absolutely refuse to consider any other possibility. I’ve received emails from people who say, “Your articles are very interesting, but of course I know this is an epidemic caused by the Ebola virus.” They don’t know. They believe. They accept what they’re being told.

Q: Just to be clear, you’re saying we shouldn’t accept the premise that the US and European “Ebola cases” really have the Ebola virus.

A: Not unless, in each case, the actual virus is found and extracted from their bodies and isolated. That’s step one. Step two is, the virus is found in great quantity in the person.

Q: Why is quantity important?

A: Because you need millions and millions of an active virus to even begin to say that virus is causing disease in a person.

Q: Are you saying that this so-called outbreak is just a natural event, and no one is at fault?

A: Hell no. All those horrendous killer conditions that exist in West Africa? They’re MAINTAINED, to keep people weak and unable to resist the corporate and financial takeover of their resource-rich countries. And the virus is the “blame-free” cover story, behind which that takeover is accelerating.

Do you have any idea how easy it is to invent the false reality of a viral epidemic? You want a conspiracy theory? Imagine this. You’ve already got huge numbers of people dying in West Africa, for the reasons I’ve mentioned above. Bad actors just need a relatively small bump, to claim there is an “outbreak.”

Toxic chemical. They seed a few areas with a chemical. Undetectable, unless you’re looking for it. Ups the death rate.

“Outbreak! Outbreak!” “The killer virus!” “We need a (toxic) vaccine!” “We need quarantines!” “Fear the virus!” “It can spread anywhere!” “Seal the borders!” “Bring in American troops—new staging area for US Africom!” “Fear in the US!” “Quarantines!” “Economic losses everywhere—tourism, air travel.” “Bring the IMF to West Africa—new deal—millions in loans to fight Ebola, in return for selling your country wholesale (again) to elite financiers and corporations.“Poison some health workers and a few people traveling to the US and Europe, call it the virus.” “Pandemic! The virus can be spread anywhere!”

The bad actors already know the standard tests will falsely come up positive for Ebola—no problem there.

It’s that simple. Creating the appearance of an epidemic is that simple.

Q: Is that what was done with SARS?

A: As one WHO microbiologist, Frank Plummer, innocently revealed (he wasn’t clued in on the script), the so-called coronavirus, the reputed cause of SARS, couldn’t even be found in most of the patients diagnosed with SARS. The cause wasn’t even there. Didn’t stop WHO or the CDC from continuing to promote SARS as a deadly epidemic. And people still clung to the idea of The One—the virus.

Q: What about HIV?

A: Never proved to cause any human disease. The same antibody tests were used there. As journalist Christine Johnson brilliantly documented, there were at least 60 reasons why the HIV blood test came up positive, and none of them had anything to do with HIV.

Of course, the people who were diagnosed positive were then fed an insanely toxic drug, AZT, a failed chemo drug that attacked all cells of the body and had a special affinity for attacking cells of the immune system—the very system that HIV was supposedly attacking. AZT. Killer, killer drug.

The Perth Group of researchers has made an astonishing case for saying that HIV was never even proved to exist.

Just as I’ve done in detailing chronic conditions in West Africa that cause death and disease, in the case of AIDS I’ve laid out (in my book, AIDS INC.) how, for every so-called high-risk group, there are ample non-virus factors that account for all the immune-system suppression called AIDS. In Haitians, IV drug users, hemophiliacs, gay men, Africans, blood-transfusion recipients.

So I’ve been around this block before.

Since 1987, I’ve watched untold numbers of people buy into the one-virus, one-cause idea, thinking they know what they’re talking about. HIV, West Nile, bird flu, SARS, Swine Flu, Ebola. All false. All ops designed for specific reasons.

Modern medicine depends on fake epidemics to condition the masses to following orders, complying, living in fear, ingesting toxic medical drugs and vaccines, from cradle to grave.

That makes populations give in—toxified, they’re too weak and confused and debilitated and sick to resist the top-down takeover of their societies.

Q: One more time, can you discuss the toxic effects of modern medicine?

A: I’ve mentioned this in many of articles, chapter and verse. There is the Starfield review. Dr. Barbara Starfield, revered public-health expert, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. On July 26, 2000, her review was published in the Journal of the American Association: “Is US health really the best in the world?”

Her conclusion? Every year in the US, like clockwork, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 119,000 in hospitals, and 106,000 from FDA-approved medical drugs.

That’s 2.25 MILLION medically-caused deaths per decade. Just in the US. And that doesn’t count severe non-fatal adverse reactions to the drugs, of which there are millions more, every year.

As for vaccines, the whole system of reporting severe adverse reactions, in the US, is broken. Barbara Loe Fisher, of the National Vaccine Information Center, has done the best estimates: between 100,000 and 1.2 million serious adverse consequences from vaccines, every year, in the US.

Fake epidemics breed unthinking fear and loyalty, from cradle to grave…loyalty to THIS system of medical death.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at


Press Cover Up of Ebola

Obama Caught Ordering Press to Cover Up Ebola


Pharmacologist reveals how press has bowed to government demand to keep Americans in the dark


Pharmacologist reveals how press has bowed to government demand to keep Americans in the dark


by Paul Joseph Watson | November 6, 2014

An eyebrow-raising admission at the end of a Forbes article written by pharmacologist David Kroll reveals that the media has agreed not to report on suspected Ebola cases in the United States.

In a piece entitled Liberian Traveler At Duke Hospital Shows Preliminary Negative Result For Ebola, Kroll describes attending a press conference involving Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Aldona Wos.

After revealing that “an unnamed official abruptly called the press conference to a close” when Wos was asked a difficult question about the suspected Ebola victim, Kroll then drops a bombshell.

“The Associated Press and other press outlets have agreed not to report on suspected cases of Ebola in the United States until a positive viral RNA test is completed,” he writes.

Kroll then felt the need to justify why he was talking about the suspected Ebola case at Duke Hospital, which subsequently turned out to be negative, explaining that he was, “covering tonight’s announcement of a potential Ebola case because it has been reported in my area, and at Duke University Medical Center, an institution where I hold an unpaid adjunct associate professor appointment in their Department of Medicine.”

The agreement between major media outlets and health authorities – presumably the CDC – not to report on potential Ebola cases in the United States was apparently made behind the scenes with no public discussion whatsoever. This is sure to heighten criticism of the CDC’s handling of the Ebola outbreak in the U.S., which is already under close scrutiny.

While the CDC will almost certainly claim that such an arrangement is necessary to prevent hysteria, many will see this as another example of how the mainstream press is more interested in acquiescing to government demands than keeping the American people informed.

In an interview on the Alex Jones Show last month, Doctor James Lawrenzi revealed that health authorities are covering up potential Ebola cases in the United States and disappearing patients in an effort to avoid hysteria.

With flu season fast approaching, experts have warned that the reporting of Ebola-like symptoms which are in fact influenza could overwhelm health authorities. Medical professionals have predicted that the U.S. could see over one hundred Ebola cases by the end of the year.

Last week we reported on how the government had sent 250,000 Hazmat suits to Dallas, while the CDC is also set to purchase over 1.4 million surgical gowns and nearly 10,000 body bags in response to the outbreak.


EBOLA Cover up

EBOLA HOAX EXPOSED: The Reality Behind America’s Dreadful Campaign Of Fear

November 7, 2014

Shawn Helton 


The Ebola ‘outbreak’ narrative within the United States has all but dissolved itself in a pool of media trickery and hype, reminiscent of 2009′s Swine Flu (H1N1) scare turned viral-flop. A non-pandemic if there ever was one…

In the latest poorly produced fear campaign coming out of mainstream media concerning Ebola over the past week, we learned that ten people from Seattle, Portland, and Connecticut, have all been placed under watch for Ebola-like symptoms following their subsequent arrival from West Africa. 

The news comes on the heels of mandatory quarantines being waved around for those who may or may not be infected with Ebola entering the US from affected areas. At the moment there are no new cases of Ebola, but let’s review aspects of the overblown ‘viral’ story that seemed to take America by storm.

Ebola in America?

The Ebola media circus reached new levels of panic upon the return of New York Doctor Craig Spencer, following his treatment of patients in Guinea with Doctors Without Borders. Mainstream media vultures moved quickly spreading fear, as Spencer was diagnosed as having Ebola just 6 days following his arrival at JFK Airport.

IMAGE: ‘Ebola fear’ –  Dr. Craig Spencer seen here on the left and with his fiancée Morgan Dixon on the right. (Photo

It was then reported that Spencer had made his way to several Brooklyn hotspots after a 3-mile run in Manhattan’s Riverside Park without any signs of being ill on Wednesday October 22nd. However, between 10 and 11am, on Thursday, October 23rd, he alerted public health officials that he had a low-grade fever of 100.3. In less than 24 hours without any symptoms of a serious illness, Spencer along with his fiancée, Morgan Dixon and two other friends were placed in quarantine. Dixon was held initially in Bellevue Hospital with Spencer, while the two friends with them, were immediately discharged for self-quarantine at home.

Oddly, without any screening, the Uber car service driver that had driven Spencer and his friends on October 22nd – was not consider a health risk by health officials. 

Let us also not forget that Spencer was said to have traveled from Harlem to Brooklyn by subway, a length spanning a large swath of the New York underground system. Given the decontamination protocols, it would seem that the subway system would’ve needed a through scrubbing if Spencer really did have Ebola – possibly shutting it down for several days, if not weeks, until clean.

IMAGE: ‘The Meatball shop’ – This was one of the places Spencer was said to have visited the day before alerting heath officials about his low-grade fever. Strangely, it only took a few hours to determine if the restaurant was free of Ebola. (Photo

Spencer’s case stirred a national debate over mandatory quarantines for health workers returning from West Africa – prompting many to approve the ‘inhumane’ isolation of anyone suspected of having EbolaThe media buildup around Ebola seemed poised to eclipse the Anthrax scare, SARS, Bird flu and Swine Flu combined, as the bio-world’s version of 9/11 – rebooting the Spanish Flu of 1918.

Currently Spencer is the only remaining Ebola patient in the US and is listed in stable condition, as he was said to have received a plasma transfusion from aid worker Nancy Writebol.

Spencer’s fiancée, Dixon, was released from Bellevue Hospital on October 25th, but Dixon will continue to be under quarantine at her home until November 14th, at the couple’s freshly cleaned West Harlem apartment, where, she is said to have a 24-hour security team outside the building. Additionally, the city has given her an iPad and has decided to cover the cost of her food until she’s allowed to go outside. 

You have to wonder why Dixon’s food and iPad are on the city’s dime, not to mention the private security team she’s had on detail at the apartment she shares with Spencer.

Who is paying for the security team surrounding Spencer and Dixon’s apartment and why exactly?

There have been a host of strange anomalies surrounding Spencer’s case and none more bizarre then the neighbor who failed to recognize a picture of him when interviewed by reporters. Checkout the YouTube analysis by Kev Baker…

Following Spencer’s case, major cities like New York, New Jersey and Illinois, didn’t waste anytime by issuing mandatory quarantines, as was the case in the highly publicized civil rights battle involving nurse Kaci Hickox, who as it turns out -  did not have a fever or any signs of a viral illness upon returning from Sierra Leone on October 24th.

Here’s a YouTube clip of Hickox being interviewed by Candy Crowley on CNN’s State of the Union on October 26th discussing the quarantine she was forced to undergo even though she was asymptomatic…

Both the mainstream media and many alternative media outlets seemed to be giving into the manufactured frenzy of fear   concerning nurse Hickox. Some news outlets were seen promoting the idea of a quarantine without any evidence that nurse Hickox was sick by digging up Hickox’s associations. However, in a moment of constitutional clarity, Judge Charles C. LaVerdiere upheld Hickox’s individual rights, lifting the unjustified quarantine by stating the following:

“The court is fully aware of the misconceptions, misinformation, bad science and bad information being spread from shore to shore in our country with respect to Ebola,” continuing, he clarified his decision, “The court is fully aware that people are acting out of fear and that this fear is not entirely rational.”

IMAGE: ‘The biological truth’ –  
Nobel Prize winning biochemist, Kary Mullis (Photo

Science exposes the Ebola hoax

Ebola hysteria within the US was further compounded after a study from the Defence Science and Technology Labratory had been revealed on October 27thThe study stated that the Zaire Ebolavirus (ZEBOV) can survive on surfaces up to 50 days and that Marburgvirus (MARV), along with Reston Ebolavirus (REBOV) can survive up to three weeks in different liquid media, with all three showing a decay rate of survival within an aerosol.

All of this information directly contradicted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) claims about Ebola’s survival rate on ‘dry’ surfaces.

Over the course of our investigation at 21WIRE, we’ve learned that there is no specific Ebola test, and that PCR blood tests being administered are in fact unreliable – as they are not able to detect a viral-load within a subject. Investigative researcher Jon Rappaport, boldly discussed this very idea by quoting from an article featuring Nobel Prize winning biochemist, Kary Mullis, who as it turns out invented the PCR test. Here is a very telling excerpt from the article by John Lauritsenfeaturing Mullis:

“Kary Mullis… is thoroughly convinced that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. With regard to the viral-load tests, which attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: ‘Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.’ PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral-load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”

In another recent article by Rappaport, we see the dark future of disease play, not only in America but around the globe:

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.”

This begs the question: Did any of the US patients really have Ebola and what can be gleaned about the detection of cases in West Africa?

IMAGE:  ‘Isolation’ – Kaci Hickox  seen here during her initial quarantine at 
University Hospital in Newark, New Jersey (Photo link

The US Ebola charade in review

If you go back a few of weeks, we were told that more than a 100 people were still being watched for Ebola symptoms after having contact with those who had come into contact with ‘patient zero’ Duncan in Dallas. However, non of these people have come down with Ebola. In fact, the entire mystery surrounding the green-shirt wearing Liberian, Thomas Eric Duncan, seemed to push the fear of Ebola to an almost ‘pandemic’ level. The fear caused was largely due to irresponsible and sensational reporting that worked in concert with advantageous pharmaceutical companies, the CDC and the World Health Organization.

In the week following Duncan’s death, the CDC claimed there was a ‘breach in protocol’ during the treatment of the Liberian man at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. This caused a string of contradictory claims and reports, as two of the hospital nurses who cared for Duncan, Nina Pham and Amber Vinson, had supposedly contracted Ebola from their exposure to Duncan.

In what can only be described as media misdirection, its worth reviewing what we at 21WIRE reported on October 21st.
In our report, we noted that the National Nurses United shifted the Ebola ‘protocol’ narrative from a lack of preparedness outlined by the CDC, to that of the Dallas-based nurses, which had been treating Duncan.

It was suggested by Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of Nurses United, that perhaps both nurses were not properly protected, during Duncan’s treatment, as she was stated to have, “vetted the claims, and that the nurses cited were in a position to know what had occurred at the hospital,” and additionally that, “hazardous waste was allowed to pile up to the ceiling,” without further explanation while treating infected Duncan.

However, after 24 hours of confusion, on October 16th, reports shifted again, stating that both women had in fact worn protective gear while treating Duncan:

“Amber Joy Vinson and Nina Pham both wore protective gear including face shields, hazardous materials suits and protective footwear as they inserted catheters, drew blood and cleaned what have been called “copious amounts” of Duncan’s bodily fluids. Still, the two somehow contracted Ebola from the dying man.”

After weeks of speculation and backtracking by the CDC, we still don’t have a clear answer as to what exactly caused the so-called breach in protocol at the Texas hospital. Both Dallas-based nurses, Pham and Vinson, were said to have been aided by the protective gear they wore, keeping their apparent ‘viral-load’ exposure very low, even though the infected Duncan was stated as being out in the open in the ER for hours.

It appears to me that the only way these nurses could have been exposed was during Duncan’s arrival and wait in the ER, if at all, but this fails to explain why Duncan’s family remained asymptomatic after having very close unprotected contact for several days.

The highly publicized case of nurse Pham seemed to dwarf that of Vinson’s, though both made a rapid recovery following a plasma donation from Dr. Kent Brantly of  USAID connected Samaritan’s Purse, in just two weeks.

It just so happens that Brantly has the second most common blood type, A+ (between 34-36% of the population), enabling him to allegedly heal freelance cameraman Ashoka Mukpo and fellow Samaritan’s Purse aid worker, Dr. Rick Sacra as well. Both Mukpo and Sacra had been receiving treatment at the state-of-the-art facility, Nebraska Medical Center following their diagnosis of Ebola.

Let us not forget the mystery patient from Emory Hospital in Atlanta, that was released on Oct.19th:

“A patient who was transported to Emory University Hospital on  Sept. 9  with Ebola virus disease was discharged from the hospital on Oct. 19, 2014. In coordination with the CDC and Georgia Department of Public Health, the patient was determined to be free of virus and to pose no public health threat. The patient has asked to remain anonymous and left the hospital for an undisclosed location. He will make a statement at a later date.”

In a recent Associated Press release, David Relman a founding member of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services advisory board for biosecurity, who also chairs the National Academy of Sciences forum on microbial threats, commented on the projected cases for Ebola in America:

“I don’t think there’s going to be a huge outbreak here, no,” said Dr. David Relman, a professor of infectious disease, microbiology and immunology at Stanford University’s medical school. “However, as best we can tell right now, it is quite possible that every major city will see at least a handful of cases.

Even though Relman admits that there will be no “huge outbreak,” here in America, he still adds that most major cities will see some Ebola-listed cases. Although Relman appeared to be balanced in his comments, the second part of his statement served to hit a fear-based nerve in the minds of everyday Americans by having them imagine a deadly virus lurking in city centers throughout the US.

In 2012, it was revealed that the World Health Organization, outlined the delivery of the Decade of Vaccines’ project in the period 2011–2020. A global vaccine action plan involving none other than W.H.O, UNICEF, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Was the Ebola crisis engineered?

We should remember how much China’s economy was effected by the SARS virus that emerged in late 2002 in Guangdong, rocking to country for a 30% loss, when it supposedly made its way to Hong Kong.
As Ebola seems to be placed on the back-burner for now, it’s subliminally dialed into your psyche, leaving the idea of disease at your doorstep – thanks to irresponsible public officials and media hype.

IMAGE: ‘Running with the Devil’ –  an old image featuring RAND Corporation’s ‘home computer’ model for the future (Photo

Ebola predictions have gone afoul

According to the Associated Press, predicted simulations modeled by Risk Management Solutions (RMS), have projected that there could be between 15-130 new cases of Ebola in the US by December 2014. In March 2012, it was reported that RMS and the RAND Corporation had joined up to launch a new company called Praedicat, Inc., a consulting services firm dealing with catastrophic management for the “casualty insurance industries with a particular focus on liability risks,” as reported by

As stated on Rand.orgHemant Shahthe president and CEO of RMS, who is also the director of Praedicat, was quoted as saying that, “RMS and RAND, and now Praedicat, are excited to extend this transformation to the casualty insurance market, taking it to the leading edge of an industry trend of deeply embedding analytics and models to increase risk-adjusted profitability.”

Pharmaceutical companies aren’t the only ones who stand to benefit from a large viral outbreak, here you can see how the research and insurance side of things stand to grow business operations as well – over perceived liability through modeling analytics.

In a recent Business Wire article, it was reported that RMS had stated that the, Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa has the potential to be the most deadly infectious disease event since the 1918 flu pandemic,” continuing, it was then reported that according to RMS modeling, “the severity of the outbreak will continue to multiply, with the total number of new cases approximately doubling each month.”

Due to RMS’s bold claims, I wanted to take another look at the back to back comparison of Ebola cases provided by the Liberian Daily Observer, a report that we covered at 21WIRE two weeks ago. The report outlines a rapid decline in Ebola-listed cases in Liberia from March 22nd, 2014, to October 17th, directly contradicting the claims of RMS…

After taking a second look at the declining Ebola numbers reported by Liberia’s largest news outlet, some pressing questions came to mind concerning the connection between RMS’s risk modeling and of their business partner – the RAND Corporation.

Think-tanks set the world on fire

The RAND Corporation a well-known think-tank, was founded in 1948 in the aftermath of WW2, marking the early years of the Cold War. Since then, many risky and paranoid-driven creations have been linked to RAND, as their strategy based analysis seemed born out of ‘suspicion and self-interest‘ which was personified in their vision of Game Theory. The theory was used to predict a possible nuclear conflict by gauging a series of mathematical models on Soviet behavior. One of RAND’s most well-known Mathematician’s, John Nash, applied this theory ruthlessly, suggesting it that could be used for other dark purposes, as those engaged in the theory could also betray one another if necessary, resulting  in subterfuge. Nash’s career of course, was glamorized in the Hollywood film, A Beautiful Mind.

RAND has developed a network of so-called field experts, such as political scientists, social psychologists and anthropologists to oversee many of its most pressing projects since its inception. 

The piracy scam could be the model for Ebola

When it comes to any kind of risk-based analysis connected to RAND the public should be very wary of their controversial claims based on history. RAND could be running point for an insurance payout over Ebola-listed cases. Earlier this year, 21WIRE learned that the centuries-old insurer, Lloyd’s of London, had seen their profits soar from the so-called Somali ‘pirate zone’ from a study conducted by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) in 2011:

“Many of the relevant players (Somali pirates, local communities, nascent government in pirate regions, international navies, private security and the insurance industry) have no incentive to stop piracy. In fact, there is a relatively stable relationship between these groups, many of whom share a clear business interest in maintaining piracy at its current level.”

DIW unearthed some of Lloyd’s most unsavory maritime enterprises by concluding that it is the maritime insurer’s who are the major beneficiary’s through their coverage of the shipping industry: 

Of an estimated 30,000 ships transiting the Gulf of Aden in 2009, 116 were attacked, less than one in 250. Moreover, the 25 final ransoms are still only a small fraction of the overall value of the ship, crew and cargo”.

Bloomberg reported in 2011, that “India is lobbying Lloyd’s of London to reverse its expansion of the area judged prone to pirate attacks to cover almost all of the nation’s west coast after insurance costs surged as much as 300-fold this year.”

It appeared as though Lloyd’s had rigged the plot, looking to profit from all sides of the ‘piracy’ trend, whether it was by coverage, protection, or through a seizure of a ship. 

Is it possible that pharmaceutical companies, along with casualty insurance market, through corporations like RAND, RMS and their affiliate Praedicat could also be looking to profit from a perceived Ebola outbreak – when you consider that they have a foothold on a big part of the narrative?

Here’s a link to the most recent Sunday Wire Radio Show, host Patrick Henningsen conducts an interview with Dr. Leonard Coldwell, an award-winning doctor who exposes the Ebola scam and other health concerns in great detail…