60 Minutes Segment - Nurse says Duncan died on Saturday, not Wednesday

originally posted by: QuietSpeech
a reply to: AmethystWolf

As wonky as some news sites are, even rt got this one right. Sounds like they were buying time, tracking down his contacts and it explains how health care workers were infected. They didnt take it seriously until it was already too late.

In my books you hit the nail on the head with your above post.
Regards, Iwinder

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

originally posted by: babybunnies
What benefit would anyone gain from declaring the death 3 days later than it actually happened? Was there something going on between Saturday and Wednesday that would have been affected by announcing the death when it happened rather than when they actually announced it?

Among other things, a football game and the State Fair both of which are huge revenue draws.

So far, we seem to have been lucky in Duncan's case only producing 2 secondary infections and no (Pham's boyfriend ever surface?) tertiary cases; has Ohio completed it's 21 day watch?

Now we are all watching New York for any potential fallout from Doc Spencer's escapades.

I forgot the Texas State Fair was going on at the time. It's much later than the one they hold in Syracuse for the State of New York.

Yes, both events would be very high money draws. Unfortunately, our politicians have proved time and again that money is the guiding force with respect to their actions. In addition to greed for power, of course.

Money talks. When you have it, people will listen.

I haven't heard anything about Pham's boyfriend. I'm concerned it's only going to be another week or so before we find out if Dr. Spencer infected anyone. I'm hoping for zero.

who did she infect or was infected buy 3 days before?

a reply to: Iwinder

He died Wed though...the nurse said so in the full interview. So the hammer completely missed.

a reply to: AmethystWolf

A good find.

And I would like to point out if the general public were just told what the score was with this Ebola crisis, instead of some TPTB deciding "Oh let's not scare the sheep, let's spoon feed them instead". Then maybe, just maybe, the a parent confusion and blunders between the agencies actually trying to deal with the crisis wouldn't occur.

When you have two different stories to deal with; i.e. - 'what we know' and 'what we can tell the public' , it is any wonder that anybody can cooperate at all!

#rantover.

Very odd they missed quoted a transcript like that. I remember the post a week or two ago when the ISRAELI news said he died that weekend....something's up.

a reply to: NiZZiM

Who misquoted a transcript?

a reply to: AmethystWolf

TPTB........lied. If they are willing to lie about something like this what else are they willing to lie about. Personally I think the whole story about Duncan was sketchy and his family staying silent confirmed it.



The question now is why...............Nah....never mind we will never know the real truth.

a reply to: AmethystWolf

Being a nurse and working with hospice patients I have developed thick skin to when they die..I also would never hold an ebloa patient in my arms...so I question this nurse's story..

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Eagleyedobserver

Read the whole thread?

good luck with that bro. most on here just need a headline, and maybe a misrepresented quote to start spouting nonsense. thank you for your find, although i read the thread after they corrected the video.

also, rofl @

BTW, my replies to Ray are noticeably absent I'm sure. I'm not going to engage him since I've seen too much distraction in other threads. So, it isn't an accident that I am not addressing his comments.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Nice find! Now what is the reason behind the lie? I mean how much difference does it make if he died 3 days later other than it pushes up the timeline for his being sick I would guess? Or that Ebola is deadlier in a shorter amount of time than was first thought?

It probably has something to do with the incubation time. If he died three days earlier that means that these nurses got sick 3 days longer after being infected. They are more worried about the panic that could result if the incubation time is in weeks rather than days, rather than worrying about stopping the virus. If it takes weeks before symptoms occur, and nonsymptomatic people can spread it, it is already too late to stop it. If you have ebola, you have ebola. Just because you are not showing symptoms doesn't mean that there isn't a level of virus in your fluids, albeit a very low level. What is more worrying is that the virus can survive on surfaces in cold temperatures like we are experiencing now for 50 days. Also, the media is not reporting on the historical cases of ebola re-infection. There have been a small number of recorded cases of people surviving ebola, being declared ebola free, only to get sick with ebola weeks later. The theory is that the virus hid in the central nervous system while the immune system got rid of the virus in the rest of the body. There are reasons why some want to quarantine people who are not symptomatic or test negative for the virus.

a reply to: SubTruth

I think people coming in aren't even watching the video...the video that is up is the full uncut video and he basically disproves the premise of this thread.

The nurse says "and we made it through the weekend".

a reply to: Adaluncatif

Jesus, read the thread.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Adaluncatif

Jesus, read the thread.

I did read the thread. What's your mental problem? This guy died when the Israeli story said he did. If he didn't he would still be alive today. That is why it was not a shock to anybody who follows the liars when they finally announced his death.

a reply to: Adaluncatif

Then you didn't watch the video or read the thread...

He died Wed. The OP was wrong and used an edited video. They didn't do it on purpose, that's what was aired by 60 minutes.

60 minutes then put the full uncut video online.

Edit: So the Israeli site was indeed wrong and that's why they printed the retraction.

Arutz Sheva did not print a retraction. A retraction would have admitted to an error.

They simply redid the story and used the same URL. Big difference.

I have screen shots to prove this.

a reply to: dianajune

You realize you just defined a retaction right?

The definition of a print retraction is:

A retraction is a public statement made about an earlier statement that withdraws, cancels, refutes, diametrically reverses the original statement or ceases and desists from publishing the original statement.

They absolutely do not have to say "We were wrong" and apologize, they just have to stop printing the original wrong article...

So yeah, not sure what you were trying to do there.

Edit: Source Retraction

I don't want to be all judge-y but, "worst day of his life"? He's a nurse who has presumably seen a deal of suffering over the course of his career and wait, he's also human, which means by his age, surely he's lost someone close to him or had some sort of tragedy one would think.

It just seems a little contrived to me is all.

a reply to: gottaknow

I want you to think of it this way... A person has an illness and is suffering terrible pain but they are locked away from their family and anyone that cares about them, they are surrounded by strangers in hazmat suits. The one time in your life that the feel of a human hand holding yours knowing your not alone is taken from you and your completely alone. Maybe thats why it was terrible to him. Having a job like that doesnt make you immune to emotions, I have been on countless fatality wrecks and cpr calls but there is always one every so often that tears your heart out because of whatever reason.

Shouldn't this thread be skunked? Op did nothing wrong, but it's proven to be not true.