Suspect Agencies involved in Ebola (Part One) International Rescue Commitee

BY ANNIE · MARCH 20, 2015

Why Ebola is a scam. The Agencies involved in pushing the Ebola agenda.The International Rescue Committee


This agency has led the response to Ebola, they have been active with health programs in all the Mano river union countries, (Liberia, Sierra Leone ,Guinea and Ivory Coast)for many years .The IRC has been coordinating efforts and briefing Government officials and health authorities etc on reports of numbers affected. They are responsible for the communication campaigns. In March when the first cases of Ebola in Liberia emerged, IRC claim to be one of the only organizations on the ground.

The history of ITC

Members and Overseers.

The President and CEO is David Miliband, brother of Ed, Miliband was the UK government minister responsible for the UK spy service MI6. The board includes Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Pfizer and secretary of the US treasury while the over-seers include the Chairman of Pepsi, Former US Sec of State, Condoleezza Rice, Former President of the World Bank, Madeleine Allbright, President of the UN, Kroll Associates, Former Sec of US Treasury, Tom Brokaw NBS news, Senior VP of Bank of America, HRH Princess of Jordan, Greenberg’s and Henry Kissinger.

Founded in the 1930s, by the 1950s it had been absorbed into the American foreign policy establishment.

Throughout the Cold War, the IRC was deeply involved in the volatile confrontations between the two superpowers and participated in an array of sensitive clandestine operations. The IRC thus evolved from a small organization of committed activists to a global operation functioning as one link in the CIA’s covert network.

By the 1950,s the International Rescue Committee had become intimately involved in a series of highly secret covert operations.

As it grew and developed, the IRC became increasingly tied to the intelligence community; during the first years of the Cold War, it coordinated a series of highly sensitive covert operations directed at the Soviet bloc countries. After 1953, the Committee became an integral component of the psychological and political warfare programs conducted by the CIA.

Once having decided to widen the scope of its activities to include Vietnam, the International Rescue Committee moved quickly to expand its operations on a global scale. Over the last three decades of the Cold War, the IRC would administer projects in Hong Kong, Pakistan, southern Africa, and Central America. Indeed, wherever the United States provided weapons and training to guerrilla units attempting to overthrow governments friendly to the Soviet Union, the Committee stood ready to disburse refugee relief to those caught in the crossfire. With the end of the Cold War, the IRC continues to provide refugee relief on a global scale, at times in areas of special concern to U.S. foreign policy decision makers.

Over the past thirty years, the IRC has come to rely increasingly on open funding from government sources, having finally been accepted as a credible member of the foreign policy establishment. The Committee’s executive officers reflect this evolution, their standing frequently dependent on their status and success as diplomats, corporate lawyers, and investment bankers.


Kissinger Associates (KA) has been involved in the DRC conflict for some time. Kissinger himself is an overseer of the International Rescue Committee (IRC) that produced a report on mortality in the DRC; he is also associated with the Freeport McMoRan gold concern in Katanga. The IRC has a history of involvement in CIA/NSA activities, such as the transport of weapons; and receives large loans from the US taxpayer via the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

The manipulation of statistics regarding conflicts is often carried out by the same persons that stand to gain from its continuation. (For example, The war in Congo started in 1996 with the US backed invasion — involving US Special Forces who massacred Hutu refugees and Congolese in Bukavu. Then the Rwandan Patriotic Front/Army (RPF/A) and Uganda Peoples Defense Forces (UPDF) chased down and slaughtered millions of refugees from 1995 (first attacks of refugee camps using secret special RPA forces from Rwanda) to 1998. U.S troops were involved in the invasion of 1996, and in the massacres of innocent people. IRC report excludes the period 1996-98 from its equations because the Pentagon, along with US-based private military companies (PMCs), Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI) and Kellogg, Brown and Root (Halliburton), were directly involved in the violence; and to shield the governments.)

Most of the stats you seen on death tools are greatly flawed. For example the IRC (The International Rescue Committee) study of 2001 that said 3.5 million dead since 1998 — well, it didn’t begin in 1998! — and so that study didn’t take into account all the people killed from 1995 to 1998, and it was a mortality estimate.


A January 20 news story calls into question the U.N.’s use of an estimate of deaths in the DRC.


The U.N. has used a report by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) as the basis for its claims that a staggering 5.4 million people have died in the DRC as a result of the 1998 war and subsequent instability. This claim made the DRC conflict the most deadly war since World War II.


A new study by the Human Security Report Project at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia calculates that the deaths are less than half of the IRC’s estimate of 5.4 million. According to a BBC story on the issue, the U.N. may have been willing to accept the Congo death toll estimate without verification in order to “justify ramping up the UN presence in the country.”


The U.N. used the report by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) as the basis for its claims .

A new study by the Human Security Report Project at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia calculates that the deaths are less than half of the IRC’s estimate. After the International Rescue Committee published its early findings of the DRC death toll, humanitarian aid to Congo increased 500 percent


This shows the U.N. have been willing to accept the Congo death toll estimate from the IRC without verification in order to “justify ramping up the UN presence in the country.” This proves that data has been manipulated to exaggerate a crisis previously. Statistics of Ebola deaths are being reported by IRC to African health officials and Govt agents.


An Interview with Nicole Walden of International Rescue Committee in Liberia, November 7, 2014 named ‘Fighting Ebola on the Ground in West Africa ‘ has Walden quoted as saying that the job of the IRC is has ranged from investigating cases to identifying contacts that may have interacted with infected individuals and tracing those individuals.


Showing that is clearly the job of the IRC to convey statistics.


Ms Walden went to say,” And I don’t think that we will ever fully know the toll, because people have died – complications in childbirth and a Caesarean section wasn’t available. People that have diabetes or hypertension not being able to get their drugs, and people passing away – the getting labs and lab technologies available to – to see whether that person died from Ebola or from something else. We’ve haven’t – we’ve been slow to get there. The labs are coming online now. We’ve got far greater lab capacity than we ever did before. And so we are going to be able to make better determinations about whether someone in fact is Ebola positive or it’s another virus or another illness. But the people who have died – the death toll of this is far beyond those that have died of Ebola.
This statement shows that even in November 2014, the IRC did not have clear indications of how many people died of Ebola and how many died of other causes, If by October, 2014, Ebola had laid claim to what some say is 3,000-plus deaths since its February outbreak, certainly this ought to be weighed in the light of the approximately 600,000 Africans killed by TB in the same time-frame.
Surely the CDC is aware that there is not a sign or symptom of Ebola, including its hemorrhagic tendencies that cannot be found in acute disseminated miliary (blood-bourne) tuberculosis, which has its own viral-like forms, some of which can simulate the Ebola.
Why did the CDC not mention TB, by name, in their short-list of possibilities that could cause Ebola-like symptoms and how has this impacted Ebola statistics?
Critics claimed that the two PCR systems to be used for Ebola testing in such “emergency situations” have never tested negative, and that besides, the tests are unapproved. But there is more. While an instruction booklet issued by the FDA showed impressive results for detecting and thereby being positive for known “Ebola” samples — it sadly failed in its inadequate selection of those pathogen’s that might be cross-reacting and therefore making for false positive Ebola tests.
In the past, as the first scientist to propose HIV-virus testing, veterinarian Max Myron Essex knew that tuberculosis and its allied mycobacteria gave a false positive for the HIV virus in his tests in almost 70% of cases. Such cross-reactivity between HIV and tuberculosis was so significant, that it forced Essex and his protégé, Oscar Kashala, to warn that both the HIV screening test, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and western blot results “should be interpreted with caution when screening individuals with M.tuberculosis or other mycobacterial species.”
A group of researchers from Oxford University and the University of Leuven have just determined that HIV is “almost certain” to have begun its spread — from Kinshasa, now the capital city of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Whether this research bears out or doesn’t, Kinshasa itself has long been a hotbed for tuberculosis — and now Ebola.
Every day we read about all the “numbers of infected.” Like football scores. What tests are they getting? Without a specific diagnostic test, we don’t know for sure if it’s really Ebola, for any given patient. This has become a standard deception for our Boutique Epidemics: diagnosis is by symptoms only. Ebola symptoms are just like many other much less serious diseases

This is just one of the many Organisations involving NGO,s Govt funded, Corporations and Insiders who are involved in the media campaigns to push the Ebola numbers, many other agencies who place themselves at the forefront of the campaign, are also involved in this with questionable data and even more questionable motives, all of whom, deserve to be exposed for past incidences of manipulation and false reports, with ulterior motives for Africa, to be covered in part two.