“If I were rein­car­nat­ed I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to low­er human pop­u­la­tion lev­els.” ‑Prince Phillip, Duke of Edin­burgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund

Recent­ly, we have post­ed a cou­ple of arti­cles at D.C. Clothes­line that ques­tion the nar­ra­tive of the cur­rent Ebo­la out­break. D.C. Clothes­line is not just a news site but a site that explores the world of con­spir­a­cy and embraces the truth movement.

The prob­lem with look­ing at con­spir­a­cies is that often times, peo­ple imme­di­ate­ly dis­re­gard them. You can tell peo­ple things like, “please just look at this video,” or “please just read this arti­cle,” and it real­ly does not matter.

Peo­ple are busy and your con­spir­a­cy is not their main pri­or­i­ty. If they are not busy they are sim­ply just too lazy or closed-minded.

So today, rather than tell you why you should believe any­thing about a pos­si­ble Ebo­la con­spir­a­cy, I just want to show you some quotes from very famous peo­ple both past and present. If the words of these peo­ple do not prove to you that the elite of the world are look­ing for a way to reduce our pop­u­la­tion, then noth­ing like­ly will.

Before you can believe that Ebo­la, or any oth­er virus, might be used in such a way, you must first under­stand that there are lots of peo­ple out there who would like to see bil­lions of the world’s inhab­i­tants dead.

Ever heard of a guy named Bill Gates?

Bill Gates is what many call a eugeni­cist, but he is not alone and is sur­round­ed by lots of famous peo­ple and orga­ni­za­tions worldwide:

“Since its incep­tion, the U.N. has advanced a world-wide pro­gram of pop­u­la­tion con­trol, sci­en­tif­ic human breed­ing, and Dar­win­ism.” ‑Claire Cham­bers, The SIECUS Cir­cle: A Human­ist Revolution.

“The present vast over­pop­u­la­tion, now far beyond the world car­ry­ing capac­i­ty, can­not be answered by future reduc­tions in the birth rate due to con­tra­cep­tion, ster­il­iza­tion and abor­tion, but must be met in the present by the reduc­tion of num­bers present­ly exist­ing. This must be done by what­ev­er means nec­es­sary.” ‑Eco-92 Earth Charter

“The Unit­ed Nation’s goal is to reduce pop­u­la­tion selec­tive­ly by encour­ag­ing abor­tion, forced ster­il­iza­tion, and con­trol of human repro­duc­tion, and regards two-thirds of the human pop­u­la­tion as excess bag­gage, with 350,000 peo­ple to be elim­i­nat­ed per day.” ‑Jacques Cousteau

“Child­bear­ing [should be] a pun­ish­able crime against soci­ety, unless the par­ents hold a gov­ern­ment license … All poten­tial par­ents [should be] required to use con­tra­cep­tive chem­i­cals, the gov­ern­ment issu­ing anti­dotes to cit­i­zens cho­sen for child­bear­ing.” ‑David Brow­er, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of The Sier­ra Club

“If rad­i­cal envi­ron­men­tal­ists were to invent a dis­ease to bring human pop­u­la­tions back to san­i­ty, it would prob­a­bly be some­thing like AIDS. It has the poten­tial to end indus­tri­al­ism, which is the main force behind the envi­ron­men­tal crises.” ‑Earth First!

“At present the pop­u­la­tion of the world is increas­ing at about 58,000 per diem. War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which con­tin­ued through­out each of the world wars… War has hith­er­to been dis­ap­point­ing in this respect, but per­haps bac­te­ri­o­log­i­cal war may prove effective.

If a Black Death could spread through­out the world once in every gen­er­a­tion, sur­vivors could pro­cre­ate freely with­out mak­ing the world too full. The state of affairs might be unpleas­ant, but what of it?” ‑Bertrand Rus­sell, The Impact of Sci­ence on Society

“A total pop­u­la­tion of 250–300 mil­lion peo­ple, a 95% decline from present lev­els, would be ide­al.” ‑Ted Turn­er, CNN founder and sup­port­er of UN

“There are many ways to make the death rate increase.” ‑Robert McNa­ma­ra, New Sol­i­dar­i­ty, March 30, 1981

Meet John Hol­dren, Barack Oba­ma’s Sci­ence Advisor

If you don’t think this admin­is­tra­tion is in favor of pop­u­la­tion con­trol, then maybe Hol­dren’s words will con­vince you.

“Indeed, it has been con­clud­ed that com­pul­so­ry pop­u­la­tion-con­trol laws, even includ­ing laws requir­ing com­pul­so­ry abor­tion, could be sus­tained under the exist­ing Con­sti­tu­tion if the pop­u­la­tion cri­sis became suf­fi­cient­ly severe to endan­ger the soci­ety.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“One way to car­ry out this dis­ap­proval might be to insist that all ille­git­i­mate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who gen­er­al­ly are not capa­ble of car­ing prop­er­ly for a child alone. If a sin­gle moth­er real­ly wished to keep her baby, she might be oblig­ed to go through adop­tion pro­ceed­ings and demon­strate her abil­i­ty to sup­port and care for it. Adop­tion pro­ceed­ings prob­a­bly should remain more dif­fi­cult for sin­gle peo­ple than for mar­ried cou­ples, in recog­ni­tion of the rel­a­tive dif­fi­cul­ty of rais­ing chil­dren alone. It would even be pos­si­ble to require preg­nant sin­gle women to mar­ry or have abor­tions, per­haps as an alter­na­tive to place­ment for adop­tion, depend­ing on the soci­ety.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“Adding a ster­i­lant to drink­ing water or sta­ple foods is a sug­ges­tion that seems to hor­ri­fy peo­ple more than most pro­pos­als for invol­un­tary fer­til­i­ty con­trol.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“A pro­gram of ster­il­iz­ing women after their sec­ond or third child, despite the rel­a­tive­ly greater dif­fi­cul­ty of the oper­a­tion than vasec­to­my, might be eas­i­er to imple­ment than try­ing to ster­il­ize men.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“The devel­op­ment of a long-term ster­il­iz­ing cap­sule that could be implant­ed under the skin and removed when preg­nan­cy is desired opens addi­tion­al pos­si­bil­i­ties for coer­cive fer­til­i­ty con­trol. The cap­sule could be implant­ed at puber­ty and might be remov­able, with offi­cial per­mis­sion, for a lim­it­ed num­ber of births.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“In today’s world, how­ev­er, the num­ber of chil­dren in a fam­i­ly is a mat­ter of pro­found pub­lic con­cern. The law reg­u­lates oth­er high­ly per­son­al mat­ters. For exam­ple, no one may law­ful­ly have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to pre­vent a per­son from hav­ing more than two chil­dren?” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“Per­haps those agen­cies, com­bined with UNEP and the Unit­ed Nations pop­u­la­tion agen­cies, might even­tu­al­ly be devel­oped into a Plan­e­tary Regime—sort of an inter­na­tion­al super­a­gency for pop­u­la­tion, resources, and envi­ron­ment. Such a com­pre­hen­sive Plan­e­tary Regime could con­trol the devel­op­ment, admin­is­tra­tion, con­ser­va­tion, and dis­tri­b­u­tion of all nat­ur­al resources, renew­able or non­re­new­able, at least inso­far as inter­na­tion­al impli­ca­tions exist. Thus the Regime could have the pow­er to con­trol pol­lu­tion not only in the atmos­phere and oceans, but also in such fresh­wa­ter bod­ies as rivers and lakes that cross inter­na­tion­al bound­aries or that dis­charge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a log­i­cal cen­tral agency for reg­u­lat­ing all inter­na­tion­al trade, per­haps includ­ing assis­tance from DCs to LDCs, and includ­ing all food on the inter­na­tion­al mar­ket.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“The Plan­e­tary Regime might be giv­en respon­si­bil­i­ty for deter­min­ing the opti­mum pop­u­la­tion for the world and for each region and for arbi­trat­ing var­i­ous coun­tries’ shares with­in their region­al lim­its. Con­trol of pop­u­la­tion size might remain the respon­si­bil­i­ty of each gov­ern­ment, but the Regime would have some pow­er to enforce the agreed lim­its.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

“To date, there has been no seri­ous attempt in West­ern coun­tries to use laws to con­trol exces­sive pop­u­la­tion growth, although there exists ample author­i­ty under which pop­u­la­tion growth could be reg­u­lat­ed.” ‑John P. Hol­dren, Oba­ma’s sci­ence advi­sor, Eco­science 1977.

A few more from var­i­ous sources:

“The resul­tant ide­al sus­tain­able pop­u­la­tion is hence more than 500 mil­lion but less than one bil­lion.” ‑Club of Rome, Goals for Mankind

“In order to sta­bi­lize world pop­u­la­tion, we must elim­i­nate 350,000 peo­ple per day. It is a hor­ri­ble thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.” ‑Jacques Cousteau, 1991 explor­er and UNESCO courier

“I believe that human over­pop­u­la­tion is the fun­da­men­tal prob­lem on Earth Today” [and] “We humans have become a dis­ease, the Human­pox.” –Dave Fore­man, Sier­ra Club, co-founder of Earth First!

“We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exter­mi­nate the Negro pop­u­la­tion.” –Mar­garet Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood

“MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE” ‑Anony­mous­ly com­mis­sioned Geor­gia Guidestones

“Soci­ety has no busi­ness to per­mit degen­er­ates to repro­duce their kind” ‑Theodore Roosevelt

“A total pop­u­la­tion of 250–300 mil­lion peo­ple, a 95% decline from present lev­els, would be ide­al” –Ted Turn­er, founder of CNN.

“And advanced forms of bio­log­i­cal war­fare that can “tar­get” spe­cif­ic geno­types may trans­form bio­log­i­cal war­fare from the realm of ter­ror to a polit­i­cal­ly use­ful tool.” ‑The Project for a New Amer­i­can Cen­tu­ry, Rebuild­ing Amer­i­ca’s Defens­es, p. 60, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz

“What­ev­er the price of the Chi­nese Rev­o­lu­tion, it has obvi­ous­ly suc­ceed­ed not only in pro­duc­ing more effi­cient and ded­i­cat­ed admin­is­tra­tion, but also in fos­ter­ing high morale and com­mu­ni­ty of pur­pose. The social exper­i­ment in Chi­na under Chair­man Mao’s lead­er­ship is one of the most impor­tant and suc­cess­ful in human his­to­ry.” –David Rock­e­feller, Banker, Hon­orary direc­tor of Coun­cil on For­eign Rela­tions, hon­orary chair­man of Bilder­berg Group & founder of Tri­lat­er­al Com­mis­sion. Mem­ber of Bohemi­an Club, prais­ing Chair­man Mao, whose poli­cies killed at least 30 mil­lion people.

“War and famine would not do. Instead, disease offered the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die if the population crisis is to be solved. AIDS is not an efficient killer because it is too slow. My favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world’s population is airborne Ebola (Ebola Reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. “We’ve got airborne diseases with 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that. “You know, the bird flu’s good, too. For everyone who survives, he will have to bury nine.” –Dr. Eric Pianka

If you throw these peo­ple and orga­ni­za­tions into the mix, you might under­stand that there real­ly are those who are evil enough to try to exter­mi­nate a large part of the world population.

Is that what Ebo­la is here for?

I don’t know. I am sim­ply a truth seek­er who likes to look at all angles.

But if you don’t real­ize that there real­ly are peo­ple out there who want to exter­mi­nate 85% (or more) of the world’s pop­u­la­tion then you might not even both­er to look. You might dis­miss it all as conspiracy.

Agen­da 21 is real. It is dis­guised in many clever ways such as wom­en’s rights and envi­ron­men­tal respon­si­bil­i­ty. In the end it is real­ly about a bunch of elites who do not believe in God and have cho­sen to try to take His place. They think they know what is best for you. You belong to a sub­species. And most of that sub­species needs to be eliminated.

That is how these peo­ple think.

That is the truth and, just so you know, I could have list­ed hun­dreds more.

We real­ly aren’t the crazed, con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists that you might think, at least not all of us. Many of us, like myself, have just decid­ed to do research that most are unwill­ing to do.