The actions or inaction of this administration regarding the Ebola virus has been enough to cause most intelligent individuals to scratch their head in bewilderment. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) continue to use 21 days as an incubation period even after the World Health Organization has indicated the incubation for Ebola could be as long as 42 days. The Kenyan wannabe King occupying the Oval Office has appointed an "Ebola Czar" that has no medical knowledge, except to possibly hold a Juris Doctorate, and leans towards supporting population control. No one, in any position of government or health agency, has even considered restricting travel to and from Ebola stricken areas of Africa to essential medical personnel only.
What this administration has done is implement a 21 day "tracking procedure" for any individual traveling from West African nations into 6 US airports, but places the burden on the 6 states to deal with travelers who do not self-report. These "procedures" have been put into place at the following airports: New York's JKF International, Washington Dulles, Hartsfield-Jackson International (Atlanta), Chicago, and Newark, New Jersey. The hope is to identify and "catch" travelers from West African nations that may be infected with Ebola as they enter the United States.
According to CNSnews.com:
White House spokesman Josh Earnest called it "an additional layer that will be based upon an effort to share information with state and local health authorities so they can put in place the measures that they believe would be most effective in protecting the populations of their state."
Earnest said "screening procedures" already in place have prevented "dozens of individuals" from boarding airplanes.
"And because of our knowledge of their travel history, we can ensure that the screening measures that are in place in West Africa can ensure that individuals are not exhibiting symptoms of Ebola. There are dozens of individuals, who based on those screening protocols that are already in place, have been denied boarding," Earnest said.
Earnest dodged a question about the new procedures being a way to avoid a travel ban. He indicated Obama was not "philosophically opposed" to a travel ban, but "medical experts" think a travel ban would make Americans more "vulnerable" at this point.
Does anyone else find it odd that a government that wants to tell their citizenry what their children will eat for lunch, learn in school, what they must think about a certain lifestyle, that spying on each individual is to prevent terrorism, and that the government should control every function that presses upon the people all of a sudden decides that "states" are most effective in "protecting the populations of their state?"
Is it not the federal government who is the keeper of the gate to decide who can and cannot enter this country through immigration, naturalization, granting of visas and allowing entry for recreational purposes?
It seems the institution of these "tracking procedures" follows an announcement made by the CDC on Wednesday. According to the CDC, "70 percent of 'incoming travelers' are headed to six states – New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey and Georgia." Travelers, entering the US at one of the designated airports, without febrile illness or symptoms of Ebola are to be followed daily by state and local health officials for 21 days after the date of departure from West Africa. If any traveler fails to report a temperature, it will be up to each individual affected state to determine what steps to be taken to protect citizens, according to Earnest.
Anyone paying attention to news other than lame stream enemedia has been made aware of the numerous bungles by the CDC, local health officials in Texas and this administration regarding the handling of Ebola. Everyone has seen the dog and pony show of Congressional inquiries with Dr. Tom Frieden and Customs and Border Patrol. Some members of Congress have spoken out about the "errors." What has not been seen is any common sense policy, procedure or protocol developed from the CDC, this administration or any identified "medical expert" in order to protect the citizens of the United States.
It has been repeatedly stated that a travel ban would not prevent further individuals with this disease from entering the United States. Since a travel ban has not been attempted, how do these "officials" know this? It's simple; they don't. Instead of using common sense, these mouthpieces repeat some political laden agenda rhetoric in order to convince the people their half-baked initiatives will be sufficient. Instead of tackling the problem using common sense, the responsibility is now being shifted to six states – six – out of 50 to "monitor" travelers coming in from West Africa that could potentially be contagious with Ebola.
It is obvious the pundits in the federal government don't know what to do or don't want to do it so they passed the buck to the identified six states who will now scramble to initiate protocols, procedures and find funding, along with personnel, to encompass the additional burden. Should not the states, which this administration has shifted the responsibility for protecting the country against individuals infected with Ebola from entering, have "standards" that are consistent? What if one state decides to quarantine in a hospital setting and another decides a hotel room is best? What if one decides to set up a "quarantine camp" and another does not? Who is to pay for all of this? The worst scenario of all would be for these states to institute some type of "travel" police state.
If 70 percent of incoming travelers are entering the US through the six states identified by the CDC, where are the other 30 percent entering and what is being done to monitor those travelers? Clearly, this creates a gap. Why is no one asking the question regarding the other 30 percent?
Common sense would dictate in a situation like this that travel be restricted to the affected West African nations and only "medical personnel" allowed to fly there. This would mean those individuals with medical training who are there to care for the infected individuals, provide research, help in isolating individuals and quarantining those infected, and provide needed medical supplies and equipment to stricken nations. No business, recreational or military travel, period. If the government needs to have "political" personnel present, their travel or continued presence would be permitted. However, these government personnel must follow the same strict guidelines for isolation and quarantine as those working directly with Ebola infected individuals before returning to the United States.
Before returning to the United States, all individuals would be required to complete a 42 day quarantine under isolation with continuous health monitoring. Any symptom of Ebola, including an elevated temperature above the norm of 98.6 F, would exclude the individual from travel until such time as infection with Ebola could be ruled out. Once the individual has returned to the United States, it would be required for the individual to report to state and local health officials regarding their health status for monitoring an additional 42 days.
The southern and northern borders of the United States must be secured; no ifs, ands, or buts. If that means armed individuals from the national guard, oath keepers, etc., then that is what needs to be done. No more illegal crossings for any reason whatsoever. If Mexico or any other country doesn't like that, too bad. Americans are not responsible for taking in their stray dogs or individuals they do not want in their country.
You can almost bet that the decisions being made regarding Ebola are not based on science, concern for the health of Americans or the devastation an epidemic could have on this nation. More than likely, decisions are being made based on corporations losing money if a travel restriction or ban were implemented – corporations who pay big money to politicians.
There is a story my Dad likes to tell that is pretty spot on in this situation.
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.
There was a man walking down the road on a very cold day. He saw a rattle snake lying in the middle of the road. It wasn't moving. The man looked closer and noticed the snake had frost covering its body. Upon picking it up, the man could tell the snake was almost dead. Feeling sympathy for the creature, the man placed the snake under his jacket to get the animal warm.
As the man traveled down the road, the rattle snake warmed and became active. Upon feeling better, but confined, the rattlesnake bit the man. Immediately, the man dropped the snake.
"What did you do that for?" the man asked the snake. "I saved you from certain death."
The snake responded simply, "You knew what I was when you picked me up."