SUDDEN and ACUTE!

[Guest guest]

Avian Flu has claimed about 100 in several years...Remember the SARS scam?

Early on, Montreal/Toronto/Hong Kong didn't respond properly to WHO and got

their collective fannies smacked to the tune of a few $billion; THAT won't

happen again.

 

This article is several years old, during SARS " horrors " .. EXACTLY the same

BS is now being spewed;

 

......it used to take a full generation before a new scam would be

tried..Remember SWINE--where there was a Mafia " hit " carried out by flu

inoculation and from which more died of vaccination complications than the

" grippe " --that was 20+ years before the Sudden Acute rip-off. (I'm not counting

AIDS, because it may be ethno-specific and seems to work pretty well for the

" population control guys " --and strangely, no one seems to be able to come up

with an inoculation)

 

Pharma/WHO/FDA/CDC getting WAY TOO BOLD and EAGER. Seems like SARS was only

yesterday

 

Take care and don't let anyone 'jab' ya...Shag

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/03/wakeup/5-2.htm

I'LL GO TO WORK FOR WHO/CDC

----AND I'LL CURB THE LIES

by Jon Rappoport

 

 

When AIDS came down the pipeline with all its false science, I decided to see

whether its number one symptom, pneumocystis pneumonia, was really a rare

disease only seen in people who were diagnosed HIV positive. I got no help

from the CDC, because that august organization did not keep stats on

pneumocystis cases in which people were HIV negative. That's called a clue.

But I found descriptions of outbreaks of pneumocystis in orphanages in Eastern

Europe and Vietnam. HIV had nothing to do with that. Starvation, abandonment,

dirty water, fear---those were the causes. Now, with SARS, we are seeing the

same thing. SARS is supposed to be a pneumonia in Asia. So why aren't we seeing

stats on regular run-of-the-mill pneumonia cases from that region of the world?

Forget the so-called SARS pneumonia. What about the regular types? Well, I did

a little digging. From the Hong Kong Annual Digest of Statistics, we get this

report: 3,087 deaths from pneumonia in Hong Kong in

the year 1996. Way before SARS. And if there were that many deaths, who knows

how many non-fatal cases there were? 20,000? 40,000? 100,000? Quite a bit more

devastating than what is now being laid at the door of the SARS pneumonia there.

So why wasn't there a gigantic outcry among public health officials all over the

world in 1996? After all, conventional doctors consider pneumonia to be

contagious. Why didn't airlines go down into oblivion in '96? I'll tell you

why. Because, unlike the situation in 1996, SARS is being hyped to the gills by

medical PR people, and by virus hunters who now have a chokehold on all

" new-disease " research. Of course, people will say the 2003 outbreak of

pneumonia in Hong Kong is different, because it is being caused by a new virus,

the coronavirus. But that science is as foul as 1000 truckloads of eggs rotting

in the sun. So far, we have no proof the researchers have even isolated this

coronavirus. And in Canada, they are claiming

that the virus has been found in less than 50 percent of diagnosed SARS

patients. And in patients where they say they have found the virus, it is in

such tiny amounts that no one can figure out why it would even cause a cold.

So we are thrown back on the general description of the SARS illness, which, in

Asia, is just pneumonia. As I say, in 1996, just pneumonia killed 3,087 people

in Hong Kong. Therefore, what is happening there now is nothing new. WHO stats

for 1997---also before the coronavirus was " discovered " or " existed " ---show

that, worldwide, in developing countries, there were 2,000,000 cases of diseases

of the respiratory system. In developed countries? 960,000 cases. And, yes,

going by the list of vague SARS symptoms, ALL of these cases could be called

SARS. Getting the picture? If you claim you have found a new virus, you can

then re-shuffle existing disease cases and put some of them under a brand new

label. In this situation, the label is SARS.

I'm looking at another pneumonia report. This one is from the Iloilo province

of the Philippines. One province. In 2001, pneumonia caused 1,990 deaths there.

So how many overall cases were there? 10,000? 30,000? All of them could be

called SARS. It turns out that, according to conventional medical science,

pneumonia can be caused by about 30 different germs. Viruses, bacteria, fungi,

mycoplasmas. So how come, when SARS was " discovered, " the researchers

immediately went to work looking for a virus? I'll tell you why, one more time.

THE VIRUS HUNTERS HAVE A CHOKEHOLD ON THE RESEARCH. It's as simple and

non-scientific and absurd as that. And when you cut below the surface of all

this germ nonsense, you discover that pneumonia is brought about by the

weakening of the immune system. That weakening can be caused in scores of

different ways. Globally, you would be looking at chronic malnutrition and dirty

water as the top reasons. Here is another thing I found out when I

investigated pneumocystis pneumonia in 1987. The germ that is blamed for this

illness lives in the lungs of perhaps 80 percent of EVERYBODY on the planet. All

the time. It does NOTHING. Unless the immune system begins to wobble and crack.

In which case, you might get peumocycstis, you might get cholera, you might get

TB, you might get influenza, and so on. Who cares what the disease name is? The

root cause is the same. Fraud, fraud, and more fraud. The train is moving down

the tracks.

 

 

 

also ck this for remarkably similar analysis...

http://health.Avian2005/links

Dr. Day on Avian

The Bird Flu HOAX - How One Wicked Nation Can Kill Billions

http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/birdflu.htm

 

 

 

Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Small Business.