Comments on: “If it isn’t Ebola, then what is it?”

By: davidcrowe

davidcrowe — Fri, 17 Oct 2014 23:56:00 +0000

You’re still assuming a single cause, single disease. First of all the 1918 flu wasn’t such a big problem at the time, it became a huge epidemic, only in retrospect. And there were many possible causes, not just one. For example, a massive fire of horse manure at a military base at the start. US Soldiers being shipped across the Atlantic with inadequate food and clothing for the cold and dampness. Malnutrition in the middle of a war. 1001 “remedies”, containing toxic metals or other chemicals. It’s simplistic to say there was a single cause (which is what Jon is pointing out).

By: theodorewesson

theodorewesson — Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:18:58 +0000

Just to add,…

“The use of a germ as a cover story for a chemical.

“In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers, to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was the spread of a toxic chemical that can’t be detected, unless you’re looking for it.”

—Jon Rappoport

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/how-they-would-stage-a-bioterror-event/

By: davep

davep — Fri, 17 Oct 2014 09:23:10 +0000

NO PATHOGENIC VIRUS HAS EVER BEEN –
Isolated
or
Characterised
or
Identified

Virus means poison (chemicals)

All methods that assume to make identification are INDIRECT methods!
Utterly Intangible!

A simple analogy clarifies this simple matter that eludes the educated.

I have a bag full of nuts and bolts from a scrapyard.
From this evidence I claim as an expert/authority that all vehicles in the scrapyard are Ford Mondeos.
The ubiquitous nuts and bolts are no different to ubiquitous protiens which our bodies recycle and discard continually in the trillions.

PCR replicates proteins, but since a complete so called pathogenc virus has never been isolated, how is it possible to identify the even smaller constituent parts?
The simple answer is that it is NOT!

The very same appleis to genetics – NOT POSSIBLE and another complete hoax.

It is the age of the chemical masquerade ! – used to geopolitical ends!

By: Doreen Agostino

Doreen Agostino — Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:51:01 +0000

1918 Spanish Influenza was a vaccine-induced disease http://www.holistic-helper.com/articles/articlevaccinecaused1918flu.htm

Only we the people united can prevent a repeat of 1918 in 2014 with vaccine-induced ebola.

By: J. M.

J. M. — Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:25:44 +0000

http://www.liberianobserver.com/security/breaking-formaldeyde-water-allegedly-causing-ebola-symptoms

By: Steve Stars

Steve Stars — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 16:30:29 +0000

Jon. Please correct me if I am wrong here:

When they say “Ebola is spreading” How in hell do they know? WHAT TEST? WHAT TEST? WHAT TEST? WHAT TEST? WHAT TEST? WHAT TEST?
W H A T – T E S T ?????

I am absolutley astounded as to the lack of ANY verification we are getting about HOW these “Ebola patients” are being tested? If you think a PCR test is specific your are wrong. You can’t get an Ebola test at Walmart. (at least not yet)

I keep searching articles for conformation of Ebola infection and the means used, and for some reason EVERYONE seems to have shut off the VITAL information to CONFIRM Ebola infection.

Do you believe this just because some white-coated lab rat says so? I don’t trust the CDC, (after 30 years of lies about HIV testing) and neither should you, when they say the have confirmed Ebola. That is not saying Ebola infection is not true. It is just that we NEVER hear any source state which specific test for Ebola is used to “confirm” this.

All of the INCREDIBLE hoopla and NO TEST mentioned or confirmed!

Here is what CDC lists as Testing: (my comments) ELISA and PCR are very prone to error. Culture may be most accurate if “ebola” grows as would be predicted. Right now, the sloppy verification of “Ebola ” testing is both dangerous to conduct and incredibly prone to error.

According to the CDC:

Within a few days after symptoms begin
Antigen-capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing

IgM ELISA
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
Virus isolation

Later in disease course or after recoveryIgM and IgG antibodies

Retrospectively in deceased patients Immunohistochemistry testing

PCR
Virus isolation

By: Nicole

Nicole — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:05:04 +0000

Interesting factoid: I just read someplace else that antibodies aren’t even needed in order to recover from an illness, and this was already known back when they began making the measles vaccines in the mid-1900s. (Mentioned in this article: “Crucifying the Vaccine Heretics. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History).” His point is that the immune system is much more complex than it’s made out to be, and that it’s still able to do its job (at least partly?) without antibodies.

By: Christine b

Christine b — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 15:21:18 +0000

Yes Quebec! I have been watching the NYT videos and I agree, they are staged. No investigation when the towns folk plead that the dead did not die of Ebola. They are called “uneducated”.

By: helot

helot — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 13:23:46 +0000

It’s Warafin they use as a rat poison, Not vitamin K. […]

The rat poison is what your mother-in-law takes to thin her blood, and it’s Very bad stuff, very.

By: From Québec

From Québec — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 20:26:00 +0000

Ebol Hoax: 100% REVEALED! CNN+NYT caught using CRISIS ACTORS! MUST SEE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZonCVRQ-2s