It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists: UN Soldiers Brought Deadly Superbug to Americas

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Scientists: UN Soldiers Brought Deadly Superbug to Americas


n ews.yahoo.com

The vicious form of cholera has already killed 7,000 people in Haiti, where it surfaced in a remote village in October 2010. Leading researchers from Harvard Medical School and elsewhere told ABC News that, despite UN denials, there is now a mountain of evidence suggesting the strain originated in Nepal, and was carried to Haiti by Nepalese soldiers who came to Haiti to serve as UN peacekeepers after the earthquake that ravaged the country on Jan. 12, 2010 -- two years ago today. Haiti had never
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
The U.N. is denying this of course but the evidence is damning.


Haiti had never seen a case of cholera until the arrival of the peacekeepers, who allegedly failed to maintain sanitary conditions at their base.


The U.N. Peacekeepers themselves are inoculated against various diseases but the natives are not.

7,000 people have died of this "new" disease already. Haiti had never experience cholera before, it is new to them.


"There were no reported cases in Haiti before 2010, ever. Really people had no idea what was happening. To hear the fear and the suspicions and the lack of understanding about how this was happening is very, very sad. The outbreak put a huge stress on what was already a very fragile health system. I'm afraid it will be a problem for the foreseeable future."


n ews.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Banbury said the UN, through both its peacekeeping mission and its civilian organizations "are working very hard ... to combat the spread of the disease and bring assistance to the people. And that's what's important now."

"The scientists say it can't be determined for certainty where it came from," Banbury said. "So we don't know if it was the U.N. troops or not. That's the bottom line."


But....


A genetic analysis of the strain found in Haiti matches identically the one involved in an outbreak in Nepal in August and September of 2010; The Nepalese peacekeeping troops deployed for Haiti at precisely that time; Two weeks before the outbreak, Haitians had reported sanitary breakdowns at the Nepalese encampment set along a tributary to the Artibonite River, about 60 miles north of the capital Port Au Prince. The next month, the earliest cases of cholera surfaced in the same remote area, from Haitians who had been drinking and bathing in the river.




And now a handful of cases have been found in Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, and in Boston, Miami and New York.


"What scares me is that the strain from South Asia has been recognized as more virulent, more capable of causing severe disease, and more transmissible," said John Mekalanos, who chairs the Department of Microbiology and Immunobiology at Harvard Medical School. "These strains are nasty. So far there has been no secondary outbreak. But Haiti now represents a foothold for a particularly dangerous variety of this deadly disease."



edit on 13/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   
So what is your point?

If true, this is simply a tragic accident. The UN troops were sent there for legitimate reasons to help the populace.
It's not like they were going round deliberately infecting people.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
So what is your point?

If true, this is simply a tragic accident. The UN troops were sent there for legitimate reasons to help the populace.
It's not like they were going round deliberately infecting people.


You really see nothing wrong here? Put your thinking cap on...

An "accident" is unforeseeable. This was foreseeable as evidenced by their inoculation of their troops against these diseases. Could they not see that their presence could also put the local population at risk? Why didn't they inoculate the local population? Short sightedness? Money?

Did they not know that cholera is caused by squalid living conditions? If they did, then why did they allow their own soldiers to live that way? If they didn't then....



Two weeks before the outbreak, Haitians had reported sanitary breakdowns at the Nepalese encampment set along a tributary to the Artibonite River, about 60 miles north of the capital Port Au Prince.


TWO WEEKS...

It's irresponsible at best... but I believe it had more to do with why they are denying it now... $$$$$$

And remember this quote:


"Haiti now represents a foothold for a particularly dangerous variety of this deadly disease."


I'm not saying it was deliberate but it certainly is not an "accident". What I am calling for is a little accountability from the U.N.

edit on 13/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Honestly? No, i don't see anything wrong here. If it was the UN troops responsible, it was a simple oversight. They were sent in for aid and for Peacekeeping rather for a specific agenda.

It is really no different to those who got bird flu a couple of years ago in Asia (without knowing) that then travelled the world, spreading the disease. Don't forget that the UN troops in question would have a certain immunity to the disease, therefore not realising they were carriers (if it was indeed them).

Now, if it was a case of a UN field hospital systematically giving the disease through innoculations, then that would be an entirely different story and would indeed be sinister.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Honestly? No, i don't see anything wrong here. If it was the UN troops responsible, it was a simple oversight. They were sent in for aid and for Peacekeeping rather for a specific agenda.

It is really no different to those who got bird flu a couple of years ago in Asia (without knowing) that then travelled the world, spreading the disease. Don't forget that the UN troops in question would have a certain immunity to the disease, therefore not realising they were carriers (if it was indeed them).

Now, if it was a case of a UN field hospital systematically giving the disease through innoculations, then that would be an entirely different story and would indeed be sinister.


Do you really think they are being totally honest now?


How cholera landed in Haiti has been a politically charged topic for more than a year now, with the United Nations repeatedly refusing to acknowledge any role in the outbreak despite mounting evidence that international peacekeepers were the most likely culprits. The UN has already faced hostility from Haitians who believe peacekeeping troops have abused local residents without consequence. They now face legal action from relatives of victims who have petitioned the UN for restitution. And the cholera charge could further hamper the UN's ability to work effectively there, two years after the country was hobbled by the earthquake.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Is it possible that this superbug was simply dormant within the soldiers, and there was no reason to check them for infection? Then they would unknowingly pass it on, and after that it becomes active...in that case, no one planned it. It was just a slip-up, with disastrous consequences.

Just a thought.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 


You're missing my point. See above. This is frustrating.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Since Nepal is so close to China, and that the disease is now in the US, do you think it possible that the Chinese had a hand in this?

If politicians won't recognize it, and debate for more than a year to simply resist publication of this info or give blame where it is due, something is very wrong...

But I'm not entirely suspecting China as Haiti was a slave state that got freed for an unbelievable price... that can't be repaid, so...



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
All of this is moot.

With the number of people, and biological products that move around the globe, it was (literally) just a matter of time before this strain was introduced to Haiti any ways.

Is it a PR nightmare for the UN? Absolutely. Was it preventable? Not in the long run.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Now I did hear something after the disaster that Haiti was planned to be the new rich and famous' playground and that it would unravel something like this
The western powers will assist in the clean up and fund and supervise the reconstruction
However when the land is a 'clean slate' the next task will be to relocate or decimate the populous then begin the construction of the new holiday resort for the powerfull
Take from this what you will but I've kept a very close eye on Haiti .....and what I've seen and learnt only leads me to put some belief in this hypothesis
Soldiers ! The perfect biological weapon.......all NATO troops are inoculated massively against many illnesses and before deployment to any theatre .......so what's to say that LIVE agents are not used in vaccinations
Essentially the soldiers are just carriers of the disease - inoculated to resist the disease themselves but 'infected' to carry it



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   

edit on 13-1-2012 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
reply to post by Starchild23
 


You're missing my point. See above. This is frustrating.


No, I didn't miss your point. You are saying this was an intentional infection of the Haiti people, and your evidence simply shows that the UN is rather chagrined by their oversight, not that they are not only responsible but purposeful regarding the spread of disease. You say one thing, your evidence doesn't back it up well.

Cry moar.


I didn't say, nor did I imply that. See above. This is really frustrating.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

edit on 13-1-2012 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


"I'm not saying it was deliberate but it certainly is not an "accident"."

Not implying? Orly? If not an accident, then what? Deliberate? But you say it isn't deliberate...so it's an accident? BUT IT ISN'T AN ACCIDENT! Contradiction is contrarily contradictory.
edit on 13-1-2012 by Starchild23 because: revision



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
That's what the FEMA camps will be used for when the UN does door to door operations and spreading their diseases so the internments will quickly succumb, kinda like what they did to the native americans in florida



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by sweetnlow
 



Not necessarily. We can't assume without evidence that it wasn't a horrible mistake.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


"I'm not saying it was deliberate but it certainly is not an "accident"."

Not implying? Orly? If not an accident, then what? Deliberate? But you say it isn't deliberate...so it's an accident? BUT IT ISN'T AN ACCIDENT! Contradiction is contrarily contradictory.
edit on 13-1-2012 by Starchild23 because: revision


Sigh... In context,


Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
An "accident" is unforeseeable. This was foreseeable as evidenced by their inoculation of their troops against these diseases. Could they not see that their presence could also put the local population at risk? Why didn't they inoculate the local population? Short sightedness? Money?

It's irresponsible at best... but I believe it had more to do with why they are denying it now... $$$$$$

I'm not saying it was deliberate but it certainly is not an "accident". What I am calling for is a little accountability from the U.N.


L2R... or, more importantly, L2comprehend.
edit on 13/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by sweetnlow
 



Not necessarily. We can't assume without evidence that it wasn't a horrible mistake.


Of course it was a horrible mistake. Why won't they fess up to it then and be held accountable?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join