It's amazing how people pay the media attention. It makes one vulnerable when we rely on such organisations for our information because they are not known for their credibility, so l sometimes wonder why people choose to go down that road. If we listen to the media we risk falling for disinfo, and disinfo is a lie, and a lie is a curse because the illusion becomes our reality.

The spiritual masters like to live in seclusion and avoid nonsense talk for good reason, to avoid the illusion and the silly distractions. Why do we want to fill our heads with so much meaningless information? Is not the purpose of life to find a remedy and to focus on self development??

Be careful of the distractions of filling one's head with meaningless information with no remedy, for that is what any type of media does, BUT, it also gets worse because they deliver the curse by filling our heads with the illusion.

When you get rid of all the muck your life does become much better. A simple life is a joyful life. Filling the head with lots of muck takes us away from our true powers.

Be wise my dear brothers and sisters. We don't need to know everything that goes on, we only need to know what is important. Human beings have so much pre-occupation with `muck' and it will keep them as slaves until they learn to overcome the curse. We cannot help ourselves..we tune into mainstream and alternative media like it is our God. We will always live in a prison planet until we learn to stop engaging in nonsense like little children. We really are scraping the bottom of the barrel when thre media becomes our information God. *shakes head* ...no wonder the big boys don't want to talk to us, our heads are so full on nonsense that we don't even know what we are. We are just lost souls living in a world of theatre.

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/02/2014 03:16AM by The Sproutarian Man.

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Not so good news: Woman being monitored for Ebola
> in Oregon hospitalized (not yet confirmed for
> Ebola)
>
> [www.kgw.com]
> rson-being-monitored-for-ebola-in-oregon-hospitali
> zed/18265269/

The results must be in by now. She's got to be positive - unless they are just purposely messing with our minds.

MADO wrote:

<<<MUST SEE VIDEO on EBOLA and media!!!
[www.youtube.com] >>>

Some people really do struggle Connecting the DOTS!!!

This link shows, in an infection rate curve, why 21 days is not a long enough quarantine time.

[www.businessinsider.com]

[jonrappoport.wordpress.com]
Ebola hoax: the feared “bleeding” symptom
October 19, 2014
by Jon Rappoport

As I’ve demonstrated in several articles, the diagnostic tests for Ebola are unreliable and useless.

What does this mean?

It means that, for any patient labeled “Ebola,” there is no verification. No confirmation. None. Zero.

Asserting the patient “has Ebola” is meaningless, because there is no concrete evidence.

...
[jonrappoport.wordpress.com]

So Ebola is just like AIDS - the Diagnostic Tests are Unreliable and Useless.

I have to admit that I'm struggling to understand what this video proves.

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MADO wrote:
>
> <<>>
>
> Some people really do struggle Connecting the
> DOTS!!!

HH,

It simply proves that the news never changes. Only the names are changed.

What woke me up to the games the media plays is this 1992 film by Necessary Illusion called Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and The Media.

This film describes how the media works to create consent in the public with the agenda of the ruling class. In these times, the agenda is to make money and depopulate the world by selling you or giving you vaccines.

I understand that that's what the effect is supposed to be, but it doesn't give us any insight as to whether or not Ebola is a real threat or not. Ebola and Anthrax are not the same thing at all. They're barely comparable other than to say that the media talked about both and presented them as threats.

Prana Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HH,
>
> It simply proves that the news never changes. Only
> the names are changed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/02/2014 08:08PM by HH.

Is AIDS or SARS or H1N1 or West Nile Virus a real threat? Ebola is the hype (or medical scare) of the day.

So what do you think of the 36 million people who have allegedly died from AIDS? Didn't happen?

Prana Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is AIDS or SARS or H1N1 or West Nile Virus a real
> threat? Ebola is the hype (or medical scare) of
> the day.

The key word is allegedly. Most those people who died prematurely died from medication. In Africa, the estimates of deaths were just mathematical projections based on the theoretical movement of the virus in people, as no such statistic were ever kept in Africa except for maybe in South Africa, and in South Africa, those kind of numbers are nowhere to be found.

An excellent documentary on the Aids hoax on YouTube: The Great AIDS Hoax. The House of Numbers Movie

From this video, you will see that the first gay victims, when the disease was called Gay Related Immunity Disorder (GRID), the probable cause was poppers, or amyl nitrite, a heart medication used for its enhancement of the male orgasm in the gay community. Later, other immunity deficiencies were thrown in, and Africa, people who were sick were declared as having AIDS, even without an HIV test ever being administered. In short, if a person in Africa did die from AIDS, we really don't know what they died of since no HIV test was given (it could have been the flu, or aids medications).

In the following short video, a real scientist is making a proposal to study HIV to the NIH, and he can't find any scientific literature that hypothesizes that HIV causes AIDS. He asks one of the one of the scientist credited with discovering HIV (Luc Montagnier) about scientific papers giving evidence that HIV causes AIDS, and there were none. Zero. All that existed were press releases.

There is also a piece on aids death statistics in Africa. Why I Began Questioning HIV (From the House of Numbers Deluxe Edition DVD)

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > The results must be in by now. She's got to be
> positive - unless they are just purposely messing
> with our minds.

Good news, the Oregon patient is NEGATIVE!

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This link shows, in an infection rate curve, why
> 21 days is not a long enough quarantine time.
>
> [www.businessinsider.com]
> -a-killer-in-close-up-2014-10

In your opinion, do you think isolation/quarantine should be more than 21 days - like 40 days, per the chart - to bring the risk to zero?

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SueZ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > The results must be in by now. She's got to
> be
> > positive - unless they are just purposely
> messing
> > with our minds.
>
> Good news, the Oregon patient is NEGATIVE!


That is good news - if it's true. She is not being released and they will not say what her diagnosis is.

[www.kboi2.com]

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SueZ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This link shows, in an infection rate curve,
> why
> > 21 days is not a long enough quarantine time.
> >
> >
> [www.businessinsider.com]
>
> > -a-killer-in-close-up-2014-10
>
> In your opinion, do you think isolation/quarantine
> should be more than 21 days - like 40 days, per
> the chart - to bring the risk to zero?


Is that too harsh? I don't think so. The larger the pool of Ebola victims the more mutations there will be and I think that is not a risk worth taking.

[exopolitics.blogs.com]

[www.thedailysheeple.com]


you'll like this one JR, your pal bill gates is in there

[www.bibliotecapleyades.net]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2014 01:39AM by fresh.

Fifth doctor in Sierra Leone tests positive for Ebola. The other four have died...

[www.capitalwired.com]

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [jonrappoport.wordpress.com]
> -hoax-the-feared-bleeding-symptom/
> Ebola hoax: the feared “bleeding” symptom
> October 19, 2014
> by Jon Rappoport
>
> As I’ve demonstrated in several articles, the
> diagnostic tests for Ebola are unreliable and
> useless.
>
> What does this mean?
>
> It means that, for any patient labeled
> “Ebola,” there is no verification. No
> confirmation. None. Zero.
>
> Asserting the patient “has Ebola” is
> meaningless, because there is no concrete
> evidence.
>
> ...
> [jonrappoport.wordpress.com]
> -hoax-the-feared-bleeding-symptom/
>
> So Ebola is just like AIDS - the Diagnostic Tests
> are Unreliable and Useless.


Jon Rappoport is wrong. He's not a doctor, and he simply doesn't have any idea what he's talking about (not that this will stop him, apparently).

PCR does work, and it's not the only test. Thankfully, PCR does identify the virus even when there's only a small amount detected; but PCR will not detect the virus until symptoms have already appeared. By then, although the viral load is still relatively small (compared to the point of death for example), it has already multiplied exponentially within the affected person's body, and there is enough virus to expect to find a tiny amount in every sample.

Again, the person has to be far enough along to have symptoms, which usually takes several days after infection. That's why it would be useless to test everyone coming into an airport, for instance. A person could have Ebola, but even PCR wouldn't pick it up until the person has symptoms.

Once there are symptoms, the diagnostic procedures are accurate and can discern that the person has Ebola, and not malaria or some other condition.

This CDC webpage tells how Ebola is diagnosed.

[www.cdc.gov]

To understand how each of these tests work, I suggest looking them up.

ELISA:[www.bio.davidson.edu]

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR): [www.genome.gov]

Virus isolation: [www.cdc.gov] (includes image of Marburg filovirus magnified 100,000 times)

IgM and IgG antibodies: [www.webmd.com]

Immunohistochemistry testing: [www.rawfoodsupport.com] (describes this skin test now used on the deceased)

People like Jon Rappaport have earned popularity within a distinct small circle, by saying whatever is popular within that circle.

Jon Rappoport's article is not based on fact. It's potential $$$$$$ for Jon Rappoport and others of his stripe. That's where you'll find the real hoax - where there are no facts, but there's potential for $$$$$$.

right, rappoport is just rolling in the $$$. unlike the pharmas and the cdc.

funny how the person who invented the pcr disagrees with you.

[jonrappoport.wordpress.com]

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> suncloud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > SueZ Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > This link shows, in an infection rate curve,
> > why
> > > 21 days is not a long enough quarantine time.
> > >
> > >
> >
> [www.businessinsider.com]
>
> >
> > > -a-killer-in-close-up-2014-10
> >
> > In your opinion, do you think
> isolation/quarantine
> > should be more than 21 days - like 40 days, per
> > the chart - to bring the risk to zero?
>
>
> Is that too harsh? I don't think so. The larger
> the pool of Ebola victims the more mutations there
> will be and I think that is not a risk worth
> taking.

I have to say I just don't really know at this point what would be too harsh. So far in the US, 21 days seems OK; but as you've noted, there's still some risk past that. I hope those at risk are educated that they MUST still go to the hospital and be tested for any symptoms up to 40 days.

SueZ, I liked this article that you posted: [visualscience.ru]

It reminds me that when I first started back to school 5 years ago, I was absolutely amazed by the detail of what science now knows.

Especially amazing is what we know about genomics and the process of translation and transcription and the incredible detail of each minute element and molecular piece of the puzzle and how these function within the whole. It's like an amazing ongoing work of living art!

And from this knowledge that our nerdy brothers and sisters have spent endless hours in research to accumulate, we now have tools like PCR for example. Of course such discoveries are amazing, and without knowing anything about how we got to this point, I can see how this would be difficult to believe.

Definitely, science is now light years past gaining the ability to detect a virus.

Regarding Ebola as a potential pandemic, I liked this article: [abcnews.go.com]

Apparently, without further spread into more countries, the potential for a huge outbreak in the US at least is very small. But this could change drastically if Ebola went into the Middle East or India.

IMO, one major bad scenario would be if it made it to war zones in Syria or Iraq - places that are already hygienic nightmares, and where there's no possibility of diagnosis, isolation, or adequate education.

given the below causes of illness:

non workers

Protein-calorie malnutrition
contaminated water supplies
overall lack of basic sanitation
toxic medical drugs
prior toxic vaccine campaigns, etc

aid workers:
In a one-hour shift, in boiling heat, they were losing five quarts of body fluid, then coming out, rehydrating, disinfecting with toxic chemicals, putting their suits on again, going back to patients for the next shift, losing extraordinary amounts of body fluid again, and so forth and so on. That would cause anyone to collapse.


provide me with EVIDENCE the cause of illness is "ebola" and not the above.

and talk to kary mullis about the use of pcr

then i am on board the fear mongering germ theory train.

---------------
Q: There are other long-term reasons for death and dying in West Africa?

A: Protein-calorie malnutrition, hunger, starvation, extreme poverty, contaminated water supplies, overall lack of basic sanitation, a decade of horrific war, toxic medical drugs, prior toxic vaccine campaigns, etc.

Q: And the combined effect of these conditions?

A: Destruction of immune systems. Then, any germ that sweeps through the population, a germ that would ordinarily be defeated, instead kills many people. Why? Because the immune system is too weak to respond. With healthy and strong immune systems, the germs would have no significant effect.

Q: What about the health workers in West Africa who have died?

A: Since unreliable diagnostic tests would have been run on them, we don't have any idea why they died. But at least some of them were suffering greatly from working inside hazmat suits, sealed off from the outside. In a one-hour shift, in boiling heat, they were losing five quarts of body fluid, then coming out, rehydrating, disinfecting with toxic chemicals, putting their suits on again, going back to patients for the next shift, losing extraordinary amounts of body fluid again, and so forth and so on. That would cause anyone to collapse.

Q: But this has to be an Ebola epidemic, with all the press coverage, with statements from the CDC, with announcements from experts.

A: That's what they said about Swine Flu, which was a dud. This doesn't have to be Ebola just because official sources say it is.

Q: Let's get back to the psychological factors involved here.

A: A person has heard all about how dangerous Ebola is. He has a fear of some unknown invisible tiny killer, a virus. He has heard about "bad diseases" coming from Africa. Now, someone from the CDC stands up and talks about the threat of Ebola and says a patient with Ebola is in a Dallas hospital, and is sick. What's the effect? Utter acceptance of the idea that the hospital patient has Ebola. "It's Ebola. It couldn't be anything else."

Q: But it could be something else?

A: Of course.

>provide me with EVIDENCE the cause of illness is "ebola" and not the above.
and talk to kary mullis about the use of pcr
then i am on board the fear mongering germ theory train.

I will answer my own query.

you will not be able to provide evidence.

the only thing you can say is that you trust the CDC.

which of course is hilarious.

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SueZ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > suncloud Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > SueZ Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > This link shows, in an infection rate
> curve,
> > > why
> > > > 21 days is not a long enough quarantine
> time.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> [www.businessinsider.com]
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -a-killer-in-close-up-2014-10
> > >
> > > In your opinion, do you think
> > isolation/quarantine
> > > should be more than 21 days - like 40 days,
> per
> > > the chart - to bring the risk to zero?
> >
> >
> > Is that too harsh? I don't think so. The larger
> > the pool of Ebola victims the more mutations
> there
> > will be and I think that is not a risk worth
> > taking.
>
> I have to say I just don't really know at this
> point what would be too harsh. So far in the US,
> 21 days seems OK; but as you've noted, there's
> still some risk past that. I hope those at risk
> are educated that they MUST still go to the
> hospital and be tested for any symptoms up to 40
> days.

If there weren't so much incompetence going on I might have hope that 21 days would be enough but there is still way too many Keystone Kops antics going on for comfort with that.


> SueZ, I liked this article that you posted:
> [visualscience.ru]

I know. It's amazing. Have you run your mouse curser over the tip to magnify the image yet?


> It reminds me that when I first started back to
> school 5 years ago, I was absolutely amazed by the
> detail of what science now knows.
>
> Especially amazing is what we know about genomics
> and the process of translation and transcription
> and the incredible detail of each minute element
> and molecular piece of the puzzle and how these
> function within the whole. It's like an amazing
> ongoing work of living art!

Yes!!


>
> And from this knowledge that our nerdy brothers
> and sisters have spent endless hours in research
> to accumulate, we now have tools like PCR for
> example. Of course such discoveries are amazing,
> and without knowing anything about how we got to
> this point, I can see how this would be difficult
> to believe.
>
> Definitely, science is now light years past
> gaining the ability to detect a virus.


Too bad viruses are even better at detecting, and knowing what to do with, us. They've been around the block a few more times I guess.


> Regarding Ebola as a potential pandemic, I liked
> this article:
> [abcnews.go.com]-
> predict-number-us-ebola-cases-26621993
>
> Apparently, without further spread into more
> countries, the potential for a huge outbreak in
> the US at least is very small. But this could
> change drastically if Ebola went into the Middle
> East or India.
>
> IMO, one major bad scenario would be if it made it
> to war zones in Syria or Iraq - places that are
> already hygienic nightmares, and where there's no
> possibility of diagnosis, isolation, or adequate
> education.

I'm afraid Ebola is catapulting out of control in Sierra Leone now and the oil fields of Sudan are next.

Time will tell if it can be contained. But time is running out.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [jonrappoport.wordpress.com]-
> ebola-hoax-questions-answers-and-the-false-belief-
> in-the-one-it/
>
> [jonrappoport.wordpress.com]
> -hoax-the-feared-bleeding-symptom/


Thank you fresh for these excellent links. It's refreshing to hear the truth rather than a bunch of parroting of a false authority (the CDC and the media).

coconutcream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MUST SEE VIDEO on EBOLA and media!!!
> [www.youtube.com]


This is great! And funny.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2014 05:53AM by Prana.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [exopolitics.blogs.com]
> lagate-47-questions-and-answers-by-jon-rappoport.h
> tml
>
> [www.thedailysheeple.com]
> -30-answers-to-who-benefits_102014
>
>
> you'll like this one JR, your pal bill gates is in
> there
>
> [www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
> virus43.htm


Damn that Bill Gates. From the bibliotecapleyades site:"As you can read below, Bill Gates had called for a "Decade of Vaccination" campaign is funding billions to research into the aerial spraying of "hard to reach rural areas" for delivery of vaccinations. WTF is going on?"

I hope this aerial spraying of vaccines never happens here in the US. The is tantamount to chemical warfare.

swine flu ---> ebola



[jhaines6.wordpress.com]

sanofi pasteur vaccine manufacturer revenue = 5.54 billion (dollars) 2012

jon rappoport income - slightly less than 5.54 billion

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> right, rappoport is just rolling in the $$$.
> unlike the pharmas and the cdc.
>
> funny how the person who invented the pcr
> disagrees with you.
>
> [jonrappoport.wordpress.com]-
> ebola-test-let-the-tests-inventor-speak/

Sorry to burst some people's blissful bubble but...(and I hope this is clearly expressed)

Here is a quote from journalist John Lauritsen's 1996 article that Jon Rappoport is using to support his claim:

“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.”

First please note that only one part of this quote came directly from Kary Mullis: ‘Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.’ The rest of the quote is an interpretation by John Lauritsen, a journalist. But that's OK. I'm aware of Mullis's views, and I will assume that John Lauritsen's interpretation is correct.

Mullis said 'Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron', which refers to Mullis's objection to the use of PCR to detect numbers. The REASON why numbers are so important for diagnosing HIV/AIDS is that the majority of scientists have believed that AIDS is pretty much the same as HIV, only more so.

This is not relevant for Ebola. There is no pre-condition for an Ebola diagnosis like HIV is considered to be for AIDS. With Ebola, you either have it or you don't. Numbers ("Quantitative" ) are not currently relevant to the Ebola diagnosis, because if there is enough Ebola virus present in a given specimen for allowing detection, there is also already enough virus to make a person sick.

Two other important phrases from John Lauritsen's statement are: "PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers". And "The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”

Kary Mullis does believe PCR is accurate for its intended use as a diagnostic tool, as evidenced by the fact that he did accept the Nobel Peace Prize for inventing it!!!!

Another major difference between Ebola and HIV/AIDS, is that until just this year, the virus(es) for HIV/AIDS had not been isolated. Possibly, isolation of the HIV/AIDS virus(es) occurred only this year. [news.yahoo.com]

PCR does not isolate a virus. Virus isolation is a different procedure. PCR is used to detect genetic sequences believed to be associated with a virus, but PCR does not isolate the virus itself.

Unlike HIV/AIDS, the Ebola virus has been isolated for many years (since 1976). [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

With Ebola, both PCR and virus isolation are used for diagnosis, plus other tests as well that detect specific antibodies only when Ebola is present.

"Confirmation is achieved by measuring the host-specific immunological response, particularly IgM (by IgM capture assay); detection of viral antigen (by antigen-ELISA) and genomic RNA (by PCR); and virus isolation."

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Here is a layman's explanation of what PCR does when implemented as one of the diagnostic tests for Ebola:

"In this technique, doctors or medical personnel take samples of blood from a patient. They then add an enzyme to convert RNA found in the blood into DNA (RNA is a chemical messenger that helps turn DNA’s “instructions” into proteins). Next, a “primer” is added that targets a string of genetic code unique to the Ebola virus. The concoction is then run through a PCR machine, wherein that strand of Ebola genetic material is amplified, or copied, many times (if it’s there, that is. If it’s not, nothing happens and the test returns a negative.)"

[www.newsweek.com]

PCR is one of several methods for obtaining an accurate Ebola diagnosis. Again, Kary Mullis does believe PCR is accurate for its intended use as a diagnostic tool, as evidenced by the fact that he did accept the Nobel Peace Prize for inventing it!!!!

So we're talking apples and oranges here. HIV/AIDS is not Ebola. HIV/AIDS is a separate issue, and I won't debate it.

AND, assuming people who use Kary Mullis quotes are Kary Mullis fans, Kary Mullis does believe in bacteria and even viruses (such as anthrax), as evidenced by this recent You-Tube discussion:

[www.ted.com]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2014 07:30AM by suncloud.