Date:   5/25/2005 8:01:29 AM ( 19 y ago)
Hits:   1,743
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=587888

EBOLA QUARANTINE IN AFRICA

2005-05-24
By - Jon Rappoport
http://unhivedmind.14.freebb.com
http://www.nomorefakenews.com/archives/archiveview.php?key=2636

MAY 24, 2005. Seventeen years ago, when I was writing AIDS INC., I predicted that "germ-disease outbreaks" in Africa would be used to quarantine people and isolate them---as a covert political act under the rubric of good public health.

Now we have a test run in an area of the Congo. The germ is Ebola, which has, since the 1970s, been hyped as a killer virus that mows down humans like a hurricane, and for which no treatment exists.

The quarantine, undertaken by the government after a small number of Ebola cases, is being touted as successful in curtailing the spread of the virus.

If you read conventional texts, you will find that Ebola is said to destroy the immune response of the body. This power is what makes the germ so frightening.

The same argument was used to explain the awesome force of HIV, the virus that, if it exists at all, causes NOTHING. (See AIDS INC. and other articles in my archive.)

This Trojan Horse image of a vicious virus plays very well as a story. People lap it up. The germ is said to carry out a covert op, whereby it installs itself inside cells of the immune system, disabling the immune response.

However, read this brief account (posted at the Mercola website) that sketches in a quite different picture of Ebola:

Strong Immune System Beats Ebola Virus

Some people infected with the usually deadly Ebola virus show no symptoms of the illness at all, researchers have confirmed, most likely because of a rapid immune response [that] controls the virus in these people.

The Ebola virus, which often kills 70% or more of those infected... causes severe symptoms; patients quickly develop high fever, aches, fatigue and may vomit blood or have bloody diarrhea. It is widely believed that people only contract Ebola if they come in contact with blood or secretions from an infected person. Most victims die within 5 to 7 days.

Researchers studied 11 people with symptomless [!!] Ebola infections and found that all of them had [effective] antibodies to the virus in their blood. Seven of the 11 were also found to have genetic material from the Ebola virus in their blood, according to a highly sensitive gene amplification technique called PCR.

Until now it was thought that symptomless Ebola infections were possible but it had not been proven. Scientists have known, for instance, that the illness can be mild in some people. This study shows not only that symptomless Ebola occurs, but also that it is likely due to a particularly strong immune response.

The Lancet June 30, 2000;355:2178-2179, 2210-2215.

So Ebola is defeated in the same way that other germs are, by the natural action of the immune system.

In other words, to explain so-called Ebola deaths, we would have to look for PRIOR disabling actions of OTHER factors that weaken immune response. The immune system is already compromised before Ebola enters the scene.

In many parts of Africa, we don't have to struggle to discover what these other factors are: poverty, hunger, starvation, protein-calorie deficit, contaminated water supplies, resultant chronic diarrhea and alarming loss of electrolytes, immune-suppressing vaccines and drugs, pesticides.

In that environment, various germs (e,g., cholera) sweep through the population periodically and cause illness and death. The germ is simply a capper to an already deteriorated situation.

In fact, the germ becomes a frightening cover story to obscure these obvious causes of death.

Why cover story?

Because death can then proceed, since all the attention is focused on the germ, and the underlying factors can be left in place.

The real op has two goals: death and debilitation; and political control of the population through enacted quarantines.

The germ as cover story is major box office. It is bought by the public because it fits the mold of a classic horror movie: the virus sneaks into the body, takes up secret residence, and then attacks from within. The religious analogy would be possession by satanic forces. The story does the trick. It inspires fear.

Going back some years, you'll recall that the public subconscious was seeded by movies like The Andromeda Strain and Outbreak, and by books like The Hot Zone. Among these tales, there was the assertion that, in less developed places on Earth (e.g., the rain forest), terrifying germs that had laid dormant for centuries were being released by meddling industrial development. Environmentalists bought into this story big-time, and used it to bolster their argument against the destruction of natural places.

One of these environmentalists, Prince Philip, made the famous remark that, if he returned to Earth in another life, he'd like to be a virus that kills off huge numbers of people, in order to curtail overpopulation and preserve the basic beauty of the planet.

Environmentalists hold sane positions; the germ scenario is not one of them.

As medical honchos run the quarantine in the Congo, they continue to tell the virus story. It keeps selling. And therefore, the true causes of death are left undisturbed.

It is not the power of germs that is awesome. The power is in the STORY.

Despite occasional task-force reports from public health agencies that do pin down the real causes of death in the Third World, groups like the World Health Organization continue to front for the "medical solution." This is a diversion. It enables more death.
 

<< Return to the standard message view