Zombie Rabies Flu Virus Cover Up Story By Homeland Security Dated 2007

Originally posted by H1ght3chHippie
The "Zombie Outbrake" is called rabies. Maybe a rare strain, but still rabies.

And a guy in China biting someone hardly constitutes a pandemic.

edit on 3-7-2012 by H1ght3chHippie because: (no reason given)

Exactly .. rabies makes totaly sense
government wants to cover that .. and ATS just did (skunk work)
they apparently voted to move it in the skunk forum because it was pure speculations

the behavior from infected dog match these so called crazy attackers

but you need a lot of biting and attacks to spread like a plague
with no cops around this time to contain the situation and shot the infected
+ transporting the victim to a secure hospital

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Ben81

 

there are a variety of reasons people flag a thread. don't make the mistake of thinking that people flagging your thread means they agree with you and/or think you are right.

If that is so, they are breaching rules for starring and flagging (yes, even THAT has rules)

think about it logically ben. if there really were a "zombie virus outbreak" right now....there would be thousands of infecteds. the areas these publicized attacks took place are pretty well populated, there's no way that a virus of that nature wouldn't propagate exponentially.

A designed virus can be triggered by anything. And can have any incubation period. If it's combined with (for example) Synthia they could even trigger it remotely.

what's more likely? a zombie rabies virus that only affects a dozen people or less and isn't transmitted to anyone else, or a few people took a new drug and couldn't handle the effects and went crazy?

The virus, since drug related psychosis have a different outcome in every single person.

i think the rabies virus definantely sounds plausable...however

Britain is rabies free, so IMO the mutated virus would have had to come from a country with rabies.
i wonder, the few incidents that have now occured in the UK if the attackers have been abroad, imported ect.

So..........

In other words, something like the epidemic in 28 days and 28 weeks later could become a reality?

reply to post by Romekje


good luck proving anyone flagged, or starred you for any reason other than mere whimsy. there isn't a motive button


and yet you have no evidence that any of these attackers were influenced by a selective designed virus. a few of them we know were taking a new streetdrug concoction. so.....no, logically the answer is not a complicated biological weapon that only attacks less than a dozen people, doesn't spread and makes them bite...but not eat people. that's an extremely convoluted idea, unlikely.

at the moment i see no reason not to believe that these attackers were suffering the after affects of a new designer drug that is apparently quite potent. rather than an unlikely scenario where infecting people with a designer rabies virus to bite one or two others and nothing else happens....ever, somehow gains anyone anything whatsoever.

reply to post by Romekje


side note: could you point me to the T&C section where it states action can be taken against a user for starring or flagging a post/thread for any reason other than agreement?

thanks

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Romekje

 

a few of them we know were taking a new streetdrug concoction.

Like.... which?

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Romekje

 

side note: could you point me to the T&C section where it states action can be taken against a user for starring or flagging a post/thread for any reason other than agreement?

thanks

usualy skunk forum are pure speculation threads
and they dont receive such attention of so many supporting the theory of the rabies virus

it do make more sense then the Zombies....
or Cannibals ...
or People drugged on Bath Salt ...
or Demonic Possessions

do you agree ?

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Romekje

 

side note: could you point me to the T&C section where it states action can be taken against a user for starring or flagging a post/thread for any reason other than agreement?

thanks

Not saying action will be taken but that doesnt mean there are no rules for it (since there are).

Stars and flags are for agreement. And to be honest, i would find it rather silly if someone would flag a thread he disagrees with but ok.

But that's not what this thread is about

reply to post by Ben81


you know when they're talking about bath salts they're not meaning the nice smelling salts you put in your bathwater right?

reply to post by Romekje


it's my understanding that the one in florida and the one out west( i forget which state) were under the influence of the new drug. please correct me if i'm wrong.

reply to post by optimus primal


here's a link to an article about what drug these people are taking

abcnews.go.com...

These so-called bath salts, not to be confused with cleansing products, are an inexpensive, synthetic, super-charged form of speed. The drug consists of a potpourri of constantly changing chemicals, three of which -- mephedrone, MDPV and methylone -- were banned last year by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency.

hope that helps

reply to post by Ben81


You need to reevaluate your sources there, my friend. It serves noone to jump to conclusions based on very questionable information.

Originally posted by Romekje

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Romekje

 

side note: could you point me to the T&C section where it states action can be taken against a user for starring or flagging a post/thread for any reason other than agreement?

thanks

Not saying action will be taken but that doesnt mean there are no rules for it (since there are).

Stars and flags are for agreement. And to be honest, i would find it rather silly if someone would flag a thread he disagrees with but ok.

But that's not what this thread is about

it was germane. ben was using flags and stars as some kind of benchmark for the validity of his thread. it's not really. sometimes people flag a thread just so they can find it again, or because it brought a new idea to the forum, or because they found it funny etc. it's not any real indication of truthfulness.

reply to post by optimus primal


That could be, but that would make 2 out of 75, or 2.7%

Hardly a "cause"