Watchdog: Obama to bring non-American Ebola victims to U.S. for treatment

a reply to: infolurker

This is just wrong. If they were US Citizens.. then fine. They deserve to be around the people with the best care and the support and love of their families. But Non-American citizens shouldn't be brought in from other countries with a highly infectious disease.

a reply to: infolurker
Reminds me of Frank Sinatra song;
"Start Spreading The News........"

Think of the chilrens. Nah but seriously. If this is true I think this man is certifiably insane.

What could possibly go wrong? I mean seriously we are a first world nation with the best of the best top notch A+++++ health care system in the world! Look how we saved Thomas Duncan with all of our superior pharmaceutical capabilities..... Oh wait that's right he died, and before doing so he passed the virus to other people.

Yeah this sounds like a brilliant plan from top to bottom!

Do you guys seriously believe everything you read? You don't think partisan groups are just making things up?

What was the point of sending our soldiers over there to build hospitals?

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: infolurker

a new report claims

claims? .... doesn't sound very certain to me. Just more political b-s.

It would never happen anyway, the republicans would eat him up like butter if he tried to introduce something like that. it would be grounds for immediate impeachment.

which is why i dont think he will do it!

I agree. Impeachment if he tries. This is DEFINATELY NOT for the better of the American people. That's putting us ALL in danger....it's his last term, lookin like he don't give a rats #ss about any of us.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Do you guys seriously believe everything you read? You don't think partisan groups are just making things up?

What was the point of sending our soldiers over there to build hospitals?

well while we are all just point blank speculating.....the reason to bring non U.S citizens to the U.S for treatment is that clearly the virus has not spread at its intended rate so they just want to make sure,the soldiers have been sent as a back up in case the non U.S citizens do not manage to spread the virus,the soldiers can return with it so there is clearly no chance of the virus not spreading on U.S soil....how many points out of 10 do i get for that bull# ?

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: RAY1990
This should be done, we live in the 21st century.

Think of the medical research...

Exactly big pharma needs people to experiment on. This is the best way to test out cures it's really not that much different the when we gave all those guys syphilis to try out cures and to fully examine the disease itself.

Exactly

But no, you should worry more about evil Obama bringing dirty diseases home... Forget about the fact that Ebola is highly isolated and America has first class health care. Those beds need keeping for US patients.

Hypocrisy at it's finest, on a public level. Everyone is bricking it about Ebola but bringing patients home to take care of and possibly make medical breakthroughs? Nah that's just retarded... What about an outbreak?

Ya'll might turn zombie

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
They shouldn't have even brought American ebola victims here. That went against every protocol. To do this would be a very, very bad idea and suicide.

Your telling me that your government handling, developing and trading biological weapons is ok but containing an infected human being is too much?

Or are you ok with one and not the other?

Why would this be against every protocol?

Wonder what the cost would be (since it will be our tax dollars paying for it).

Would it be cheaper to send the people and supplies there, and treat people there?

Or is it cheaper to instead fly each one here, treat them here, those that survive have to be flown back. Those that do not survive (dying far from home and their families) the cost of having to dispose of their bodies.

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Wonder what the cost would be (since it will be our tax dollars paying for it).

Would it be cheaper to send the people and supplies there, and treat people there?

Or is it cheaper to instead fly each one here, treat them here, those that survive have to be flown back. Those that do not survive (dying far from home and their families) the cost of having to dispose of their bodies.

And what makes you think we'd fly them back home? It's not like we send any other uh, "visitors" back home.

We'd probably fly in their families as well, for "moral support", find them a place to live, some food stamps, Medicaid, etc.

Why not? We do it for everyone else. Well, unless you're an actual citizen ...

a reply to: LDragonFire

How many known cases of Ebola were in the US before those two missionaries were brought here and treated? I didn't hear of any. So unless I'm mistaken bringing MORE infected people here will not turn up with any kind of positive reaction.

originally posted by: RAY1990

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
They shouldn't have even brought American ebola victims here. That went against every protocol. To do this would be a very, very bad idea and suicide.

Your telling me that your government handling, developing and trading biological weapons is ok but containing an infected human being is too much?

Or are you ok with one and not the other?

Why would this be against every protocol?

I told you no such things. Please do not assign your words to me.

a reply to: infolurker

Obama building his base but at the expense of the country that his installers put him in office for. There won't be a country left with anyone with an IQ over 75...if that, but by god they will have control.

Looks like Obama's handlers are as stupide and mentally challenged as he is.

a reply to: infolurker

I can confirm that whatever Obola says, he will do the exact opposite! He only pays attention when "cha ching" a Czar job opening is coming available. I am sure one of his friends with benefit$ will buy that position.

originally posted by: RAY1990
This should be done, we live in the 21st century.

Think of the medical research...

Research can be conducted in west Africa, too.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: RAY1990

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
They shouldn't have even brought American ebola victims here. That went against every protocol. To do this would be a very, very bad idea and suicide.

Your telling me that your government handling, developing and trading biological weapons is ok but containing an infected human being is too much?

Or are you ok with one and not the other?

Why would this be against every protocol?

I told you no such things. Please do not assign your words to me.

I don't believe I am.

Scrap the first two questions if it makes you uncomfortable. Why is this against every protocol?

a reply to: RAY1990

i'll answer that. in a outbreak one of the main objectives is to isolate the pathogen in place.
not transport it all over the world.

a reply to: rockintitz

Or on military aid ships, shouldn't the world not be giving it's best resources to this "epidemic" I mean the world has been screaming plague after all.

a reply to: RAY1990

Those were not questions based on the OP or anything I said. How they make me feel is of no issue.

It is against every protocol to bring infection into an area that is infection free. You isolate it. Use quarantine. Yet they're flying people intentionally around the world as if they want to spread it. It's total BS.