Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Dr Zelenko on Israel National News, May 21, 2020 — forthcoming paper ~ two weeks?

Categories
Academic Freedom
Defending our Civilization
Medicine
News Highlights
rhetoric
Sci-Tech watch
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Dr Zelenko expects to be in publication along with some German colleagues, in about two weeks. In the following video (pardon quality issues):

. . . he asks, in effect, isn’t it standard to treat a disease as early as possible, so why the strange difference here? He makes a comparison to how a fire can flash over into a much more dangerous stage and notes how much easier it is to hit it while it is small. He expresses a measure of anger with medical and political establishments, /do allow for that.

He identifies that by the time people are at a Doctor’s office they are likely to be about day 5 in the disease process, on the verge of an explosion in viral load with attendant damage to the body.

He estimates turnaround time at about 3 days on tests, thus if you wait you likely have had serious damage due to explosion in viral load with attendant cell destruction to produce those viruses; linked doubtless, is immune response which can spin out of control in a potentially fatal cytokine storm.

He points to manageable toxicity and safety then suggests, go on the drug cocktail, then pull back if there is no need.

An implication of his discussion is what we may call the U-model of such a disease as this. As came up in a current UD thread:

The idea is that a fast-mover disease like this triggers a U-shaped trend (with a potentially catastrophic descending arm), where the crisis is the bend. Those who fail to make it, unfortunately die . . . a reverse J as the rising arm has been frustrated. Recovery then takes an onward period so recovery statistics lag death statistics, part of the epidemiologist’s headaches. Of course, relapses can move us to a W . . . double U . . . etc. So, we have a simple descriptive model of the trend of such an illness. [This is similar to the plucking model of recession in economics.] The stitch in time factor is, to hit the process early in the descending arm, so the U is shallow; you will probably recall the question of building up one’s “resistance” to colds, Flu and the like. In the context of Ivermectin, its preliminary indication is that it can help to pluck back up from further down the descending arm. And of course hospitalisation is an index of being fairly far down the arm, ICU being a yet worse sign. Intubation and Ventilation are grim signs.

While we wait on his announced publication, we may wish to discuss. END

PS: An interesting second vid comes from India, courtesy Tech for Luddites:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8HtWHAr9rI

PPS: Here is the screen clip, June 3rd:

Screenshot from Twitter
Comments
Just an observation on the relative differences between Canada and the US with respect to their COVID responses. I have repeatedly stated that the number of cases and number of deaths are proportionately higher in the US than in Canada, by a large measure. KF has responded that this was because the rapid spread in Canada started later than the US. Given that the US peaked somewhere around April 7 and Canada a couple weals later, KF’s rationale made sense. But the rates of decline in new cases, given that they are both testing at comparable rates, should be completely due to the effectiveness of respective actions. Since the peak, the number of daily new cases has dropped approximately 50% in Canada and 35% in the US. Given that the US has been in the decline mode at least two weeks longer than Canada, it is pretty clear that Canada is being more effective.Ed George
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:50 PM
6
06
50
PM
PDT
KF
I think it would be advisable to cease from further discussion on this tangent, given its needless, toxic nature
I don't agree that the topic is, by nature, toxic. And I do not agree that there are grounds to cease the dialogue. For example, I'd wish to respond to EG. But I certainly accept and will support your decision to close off the discussion.Silver Asiatic
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
05:47 PM
5
05
47
PM
PDT
KF & EG, The widespread violence has begun sooner than I thought it would. I predict it will get really nasty. Civil war may not be too far behind. We know who the traitors are. We know who has been fueling the fire of division. They call themselves globalists and they hate Christians. Make sure you are on the winning side.FourFaces
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
05:38 PM
5
05
38
PM
PDT
EG, let us turn from this needlessly toxic sidetrack. I believe SA has been given enough. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
04:21 PM
4
04
21
PM
PDT
SA
I didn’t see FF having an animosity on racial lines – he was praising Orthodox Jews who are presumably the same race as the atheist-Jews he was condemning.
If he was just criticizing secularists, that would not be racist. But he limited his rant to secular Jews. That makes it racist. Yes, there are many very successful and powerful people who are of Jewish ancestry. All I hear from FF’s nonsense is jealousy. And then he justifies his racism with the old, “some of my best friends are Jewish”, crap.Ed George
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
03:28 PM
3
03
28
PM
PDT
FF, as a point of fact, notoriously, the most strident polemics against the design inference and likewise against Judaeo-Christian theism in recent years -- they typically erroneously conflated the two -- came from the now palpably fading so-called New Atheists. Their rhetorical stridency, somewhat amateurish philosophical and theological musings and question begging a priori evolutionary materialistic scientism have clearly failed. Corrections came from many angles including from non theistic thinkers. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
02:26 PM
2
02
26
PM
PDT
SA, I do not think that further discussion on this matter will be of much profit. Given your concerns as I just saw, I will simply note that critique of a theology or of a worldview, or of specific behaviour of particular representatives acting in an official capacity (consider the Catholic concept of anti-popes or critiques of the Judaean leadership of the Sanhedrin c 30 AD), is not to properly be equated to hatred of a race. No fair minded person could responsibly argue otherwise; though irresponsible rhetors will clearly be just that, irresponsible. One of the basic problems above as noted is that radical secularist ideologies including Marxism and Evolutionary Materialistic Scientism -- simply as a fact of history of ideas -- are not solely or even in the main or in the large either specifically Jewish creations or overwhelmingly Jewish in composition of adherence. Nor are the views of adherents of such systems determined by their having one drop of Jewish blood. That is a red line, one crossed by one certain Mr Schicklegruber 80 years ago in describing Bolshevism, and it is a line we must be vigilant about. Beyond this, I have only resorted to further comment as it seemed a balancing remark was necessary. I think it would be advisable to cease from further discussion on this tangent, given its needless, toxic nature and the fact that something else is on the table that is of far greater urgency that requires cool-headed sober analysis. I request that further discussion on this toxic tangent ceases. I am sorry if this leaves some unsettled in mind but on the evidence of logic challenges embedded in a deeply polarised civilisation, I doubt that any reasonable and satisfactory generally accepted conclusion can be reached. Indeed, re-emergence of racial polarisation is a sign of the depth of polarisation at work. No good result can be achieved, so, let us not further weigh down this thread with a needless, toxic tangent. KF PS: I should note for DS that up to the 1960's it was routine for establishment figures to state dubious racist sentiments; one discounts for that in reading. The locus I have seen suggested above is younger generations.kairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
02:19 PM
2
02
19
PM
PDT
Israel’s Health Ministry is warning people not to “slip into complacency” about the coronavirus after recording a spike in new cases. The ministry reported another 64 cases late Thursday after weeks of steady improvement when the total number of active cases dropped below 2,000. New outbreaks have been linked to schools, which recently reopened after weeks of lockdown. Authorities have lifted most of the restrictions in recent weeks. This week bars, restaurants, pools and hotels were allowed to reopen. Authorities are urging people to wear masks in public and practice social distancing, but in recent days many have appeared to ignore the rules. https://apnews.com/b98d942c6713d63a965a6a9cda1d7179rhampton7
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
02:12 PM
2
02
12
PM
PDT
A new study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that from March 15 to March 21, prescriptions for a 30-day supply of hydroxychloroquine surged 1,977%, from 2,208 to 45,858. It also found that prescriptions for a 30-day to 60-day supply jumped 179%, from 70,472 to 196,606, and prescriptions for a more than 60-day supply increased 182%, from 44,245 to 124,833. Since that week, prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine have steadily declined. However, a total of 483,425 excess fills of the drug were issued during the 10-week period that began March 15 when compared to the same time period in 2019. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hydroxychloroquine-prescriptions-surged-2-000-after-trump-promoted-drugrhampton7
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
01:57 PM
1
01
57
PM
PDT
KF
Enough is there above to show that we are not afraid to deal with the problem, that the balance on merits is not in favour of this or any other form of racism, and that persistent advocates are unlikely to yield to mere correction.
I didn't see FF having an animosity on racial lines - he was praising Orthodox Jews who are presumably the same race as the atheist-Jews he was condemning. But from an ID vs Darwin perspective, I think racism is a very big issue and has been dealt with by Richard Weikart among others. As stated above, we run into a very big problem when any criticism of Judiasm is immediately categorized as a racial attack. Of course, it can logically be seen that way, since Judiasm is a racial construct. So, if a person opposes Jewish activities, he can be considered anti-Jewish, and thus anti-Semitic. But can we see how this becomes a trap which means that a certain religion is entirely immune from criticism (and it can be even illegal to criticize it in some places), thus leading to an unfair, or even oppressive attitude and the group adopting a privileged role in society? As stated, it is this lack of clarity that causes the underground, Jewish hatred that eventually spills out into prejudice and violence. I see this as relevant to ID because we talk about the origin of human life and we have to sort through racial issues.Silver Asiatic
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
09:14 AM
9
09
14
AM
PDT
KF
the manifest lack of merit to racist conspiracising is readily seen
I am just proposing some clarity, prudence and justice on these matters. You've used the term racist here, without warrant. However, I fully understand that since Judiasm has a racial component, then, as many believe, any critique in that direction is to be considered anti-Semitic racism. But that makes real discussion impossible. FF
But you ID people and Catholics need to understand who your most strident enemy is. It’s not the orthodox Jew who believes in God and creation. It’s the atheist Jew who hates God and wants to destroy your nations, your borders and your religion through propaganda, decadence, deception and incessant lies.
As stated above, I don't make that distinction, as I showed that even Orthodox Jews accept atheists as "fully Jewish". As a Catholic, I accept that Judiasm is our enemy, and we are commanded to love our enemies and to care for them and do good for them. Violence against Jews has always been forbidden - formally by the Holy See in the 1100s where Catholics, under pain of excommunication, were forbidden to harm Jews, but that was not a new doctrine. It was always in place, in spite of the fact that many Catholics cruelly violated that directive. DS
Anyway, there seems to be quite a bit of blaming the “establishment”, evo-mats, and fellow-travelers for antisemitism and the like. While certain factions are obviously trying to divide us, I can’t see holding anyone else to account for my own prejudices—that’s on me. Do you think anyone else is responsible for your interlocutor’s destructive views?
When I point blame at those sources, I'm just considering the underlying worldview that is logically consistent with various evils against people. It is a constant theme here that evo-materialism lacks any foundation for consistent morals. So, rather than point the blame to various individuals, it is the philosophical error that gets targeted, since that is what shaped the materialist-culture. Certain individuals are leaders, so they get some particular blame.Silver Asiatic
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
09:06 AM
9
09
06
AM
PDT
DS, I think more than enough has surfaced to show this is a real problem and that, sometimes at least, it will not yield to simple corrective evidence. Not a good sign. I doubt that entertaining such in a thread would be of any benefit, in that light. Enough is there above to show that we are not afraid to deal with the problem, that the balance on merits is not in favour of this or any other form of racism, and that persistent advocates are unlikely to yield to mere correction. That does not point to profitable discussion. I do note that establishments are sometimes racist, that there has been significant advance since WW2, and that ideological polarisation tied to ruthless factionalism is a more serious pattern of problems in terms of being a major, clear, present danger. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
08:39 AM
8
08
39
AM
PDT
KF, You don't have to ban me, man. I'm gone. But you ID people and Catholics need to understand who your most strident enemy is. It's not the orthodox Jew who believes in God and creation. It's the atheist Jew who hates God and wants to destroy your nations, your borders and your religion through propaganda, decadence, deception and incessant lies. Hasta la vista. PS. Just a minor criticism of your style. I think you write too many words to say simple things. :-DFourFaces
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
07:38 AM
7
07
38
AM
PDT
KF, Perhaps a separate thread for these issues would be useful? OTOH, it might be too charged of a topic. Anyway, there seems to be quite a bit of blaming the "establishment", evo-mats, and fellow-travelers for antisemitism and the like. While certain factions are obviously trying to divide us, I can't see holding anyone else to account for my own prejudices---that's on me. Do you think anyone else is responsible for your interlocutor's destructive views?daveS
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:58 AM
6
06
58
AM
PDT
SA, yes, the polarisation is manifest on particular issues that become hot button as they run counter to the agenda of the establishment's key factions. Selective hyperskepticism, dismissiveness to valid but inconvenient evidence, deliberate polarisation, undermining of inductive reasoning ability and more, joined to evolutionary materialistic scientism are doing a number on us. A return to prudence would make a big difference. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:37 AM
6
06
37
AM
PDT
KF
My own diagnosis is that resurgence of the sort you describe is a blowback from the undermining of sound thinking on logic and especially inductive warrant, inference to the best current explanation on the merits and prudence in recent decades.
For me, a simple replacement of hyper-skepticism for the charioteer of the virtues is not a sufficient explanation for the specific sort of blowback that I referenced. Imprudent thought could result in any number of errors, but this particular situation is furthered by irrational fear and a shut-down of discussion, demonizing of opposition and a failure to gain any real understanding of the issue as a result. It's similar to what we find in the opposition to ID.Silver Asiatic
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:31 AM
6
06
31
AM
PDT
BO'H, If HCQ is strongly cardio-toxic in itself, that should long since have showed up; especially in cases where it is in long term use; where, effectively, all drugs are poisons used in small doses. It isn't. The issue, then is interaction with the situation, where a key confounding factor is it is known that SARS-2 and as a result COVID-19 attack the heart and cardiovascular system. Another is that Azithromycin can have effects on the heart, part of why Doxycycline is also being looked at (cf. above re a Raoult report on that). The further evidence from the 500+ CT scans is that lung legions are apparently already happening before obvious symptoms, indicating damage is happening fast and silently, which would point to cardiovascular system damage too. This is a sneaky, fast moving killer. I am perfectly willing to buy that an already damaged and strained heart-lung-circulatory system to the point of hospitalisation would make strongly acting drugs significantly more toxic than otherwise. But at the same time, there is a relevant otherwise: earlier in the disease process, where the evidence that seems to be being sidelined points to ability to keep people from deteriorating to the point of needing hospitalisation. That is why I am pointing to the significance of the U, AND to questions on how we are thinking and deciding. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:30 AM
6
06
30
AM
PDT
I don’t think HCQ has been used against COVID-19 for decades.
Who said that? I don't believe anyone here has said that. It has been used for decades and considered harmless. It was over the counter in France till a few months ago and used widely as a prophylactic in the United States. It is widely prescribed for other afflictions and there is no wide negative effects. The Lancet data is showing ventilator use at much higher rates among HCQ patients. Why? No one has proposed that HCQ exacerbates the disease. The study did not say the deaths were due to heart problems. So an alternative hypothesis is that it was given to more severely ill patients. This would invalidate the whole Lancet study. It was also during a time when testing in North America was problematic and took a long time sometimes a week. So when it was given relative to the time first infected seemed to be an unknown. Just that they were hospitalized. Do you have any information that is contrary? I will use the example of my friend. He was hospitalized with pneumonia and was described as unconscious on a ventilator and fighting for his life. It then came back that he had C19 and was given HCQ. Last I heard he was better but still weak. This seemed typical at the time in early to mid March.jerry
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:28 AM
6
06
28
AM
PDT
I think we can agree that there is something wrong with the pattern of the data and how it is reported. If HCQ is destructive, then a much wider ban should have been set up, but that would cut across decades of successful use.
I don't think HCQ has been used against COVID-19 for decades.
However, Raoult’s 500+ CT scans are showing that as soon as symptoms appear damage has already begun, and it is known that the virus also causes cardiovascular system damage.
Right, so could this be interacting with the effect of HCQ on the heart?Bob O'H
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:14 AM
6
06
14
AM
PDT
Jerry, I think we can agree that there is something wrong with the pattern of the data and how it is reported. If HCQ is destructive, then a much wider ban should have been set up, but that would cut across decades of successful use. The howls of protest would be overwhelming. That sort of hedging is already deeply worrying, as it is a sign that something is wrong with the narrative being projected to us. So, they almost have to be implying an interaction effect with the virus, which might be broader than making it more virulent but would include such. That is already something that needs to be very carefully and cogently explained to us. However, Raoult's 500+ CT scans are showing that as soon as symptoms appear damage has already begun, and it is known that the virus also causes cardiovascular system damage. At the same time, they are saying they are compensating for differences in data sets so they can match outcomes. Some, suggest, a bit too much. However, that is not pivotal, what is, is as you have highlighted is that this is on hospitalised patients, implying a significant amount of damage given those scans. The problem with that is that this points to intervention that is too far down the descending arm of the disease trajectory U to be relevant to early positive impacts of the cocktail as Raoult, Zelenko and others are documenting. Comparing sweet crab apples with sweet at first but deadly beach death apples. Where the sort of researchers, editors and peer review people involved have to be far too technically sophisticated to simply stumble into conflating materially distinct circumstances. So, we are looking at a bad sign. I suspect, gold standard fallacy and belittling labelling has led to sweeping away the evidence on early stage effectiveness, whatever has led to only under hospital like circumstances then locks in failure as perceived and those crying foul don't count. Except, that in a day of peasant uprisings, the deplorables do count. What then becomes interesting is why is there such a push to lock out early and preventive treatments that on the body of evidence in hand are clearly effective and may reduce death rates by up to 90+% in some cases relative to the baseline of treat like Flu with complications. Compound with the influence of the deep polarisation in our civilisation, especially the US and I point to plausibility structures and power systems in the research, administrative and pharmaceutical institutions and networks as well as the media and government that are clearly civilisation-toxic. THAT is the other disease we need to be fixing, pronto. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
06:03 AM
6
06
03
AM
PDT
Kf, One of two hypothesis from Lancet analysis is likely true. Either HCQ causes virus to become more virulent or Much more serious patients received HCQ First is contrary to all other information. Second is based on reported anecdotes of treatment. If I were given a bet, I know where my money would be. Data shows extremely higher use of ventilation with HCQ patients. Either way study is irrelevant since this Is a late stage study during a time with problematic testing. Which means imprecise knowledge of time of infection. If true, these doctors are willing to let people die for some unstated reasons by using a false study.jerry
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
03:51 AM
3
03
51
AM
PDT
F/N: Questions emerge over the Lancet study, and of course my initial markup in the previous thread is still there. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
12:58 AM
12
12
58
AM
PDT
SA, for this thread, there has been enough of a discussion, with ample opportunity to take correction; the manifest lack of merit to racist conspiracising is readily seen, as is the issue of ever deepening polarisation that we have raised so often here at UD. My own diagnosis is that resurgence of the sort you describe is a blowback from the undermining of sound thinking on logic and especially inductive warrant, inference to the best current explanation on the merits and prudence in recent decades. What ever did those who promoted hyperskepticism as an intellectual virtue in the place of the charioteer of the virtues, prudence, imagine? Wasn't the warning in Plato's Ship of State and Cave enough, even for those who would not heed Ac 27? (The latter being far more accessible . . .) My personal conclusion is the need to do more on logic and first principles of right reason here at UD. KF PS: Let me add a verse or two of Scripture:
Amos 5:12 For I know your transgressions are many and your sins are great (shocking, innumerable), You who distress the righteous and take bribes, And turn away from the poor in the [court of the city] gate [depriving them of justice]. 13 Therefore, he who is prudent and has insight will keep silent at such a [corrupt and evil] time, for it is an evil time [when people will not listen to truth and will disregard those of good character]. 14 Seek (long for, require) good and not evil, that you may live; And so may the Lord God of hosts be with you, Just as you have said!
Of course, the other side of the coin is the even more famous passage in 3:7 - 8:
Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God does nothing [a]Without revealing His secret plan [of the judgment to come] To His servants the prophets. 8 The lion has roared! Who will not fear? The Lord God has spoken [to the prophets]! Who can but prophesy?
In an evil day when the innocent is often targetted for destruction and corruption rides rampant, prudence is to keep one's counsel to oneself. But, there is a magnificent and costly exception: trumpet the prophetic word to an untoward generation under judgement of consequences of its entertaining evil. That's the foundation of being the good man in the storm as Ac 27 indicates,kairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
12:36 AM
12
12
36
AM
PDT
RH7, 76, yes, the issue is to address the U early in the descending arm. Dr Raoult's latest paper points to hundreds of CT scans showing lung legions already there with only mild symptoms. Not a good sign, this is one sneaky, fast-moving killer and whatever plausibility structures led to the notion that treatment should be delayed until enough damage is done that need for hospitalisation is obvious, is missing the mark by far. The stitch in time factor is clearly even more serious than we may have thought. KF PS: Onward, a serious global priority needs to be the identification and development of broad-spectrum antivirals suitable for prescription and follow up by a doctor or nurse practitioner without need for hospitalisation. SARS2 is a clear, grim warning.kairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
12:23 AM
12
12
23
AM
PDT
FF, that's enough. You have had ample chance to take advantage of an opportunity of correction. It is now quite clear that there is enough to settle the merits and that further exchanges will spiral into personalities as has just begun. I am gavelling the side-tracking now. There will be no further discussion on this needless tangent. I suggest that a more positive and reasonable approach on your part would be helpful to you and others, and no, if you provoke a disciplinary response through toxic onward distractive behaviour, it will not be because we are persecuting you; it will be the equivalent of removing an ill-disciplined disruptive child from a classroom for cause. The subject on the table, as the OP states, is a pandemic and there are serious linked issues confronting the world. KFkairosfocus
May 29, 2020
May
05
May
29
29
2020
12:15 AM
12
12
15
AM
PDT
KF, You should get ready. Ed George and DaveS are making ad hominem threats. Soon, UD's editors will be accused of being Nazis, right wing racists and fascists but never Bolsheviks for some strange reason. Have fun. :-D PS. Ban me now and your problem is solved. :-DFourFaces
May 28, 2020
May
05
May
28
28
2020
08:57 PM
8
08
57
PM
PDT
This is definitely a new low for UD. Tolerating some tinfoil hat commando complaining about Jewish conspiracies.Ed George
May 28, 2020
May
05
May
28
28
2020
08:14 PM
8
08
14
PM
PDT
A growing pool of global death statistics indicates that few countries are accurately capturing fatalities from the new coronavirus—and in some the shortfall is significant. In the U.S., Russia, the U.K., the Netherlands and many other countries, the number of deaths recorded from all causes has jumped since March and far exceeded the number of deaths those countries report as linked to Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-countries-fail-to-capture-extent-of-covid-19-deaths-11590658200rhampton7
May 28, 2020
May
05
May
28
28
2020
06:55 PM
6
06
55
PM
PDT
Chief Medical Officer Allison Suttle of Sanford Health said those studies used the drug to treat people infected with the virus. At first, South Dakota’s pilot study was looking at the same thing. “There were some cases where we were treating patients with hydroxychloroquine in the hospital setting,” Suttle said. “But those physicians, those critical-care docs that meet regularly and discuss the literature, are now saying that hydroxychloroquine is not useful in those scenarios.” Suttle made the remarks during a joint press conference Thursday with Gov. Kristi Noem. Suttle said South Dakota will continue its hydroxychloroquine trial only on people who’ve been exposed to COVID-19, but have not tested positive. If doctors say they’re a good candidate, volunteers will get either the drug or a placebo. https://listen.sdpb.org/post/state-keeps-hydroxychloroquine-trial-only-prevention-drug-won-t-go-sick-patientsrhampton7
May 28, 2020
May
05
May
28
28
2020
06:27 PM
6
06
27
PM
PDT
KF, Please stop speaking in tongues and making threats. Put your money where your mouth is and ban me. You'll be vindicated and I'll be out of your hair. SA, Thank you for that well thought-out reply. I agree that these issues should be discussed but the globalists hate free speech. Anti-Jewish sentiments are growing fast and I wish that the rich and powerful atheist Jews who control so much of Western life would do an about face and stop their subversion of Western Christian nations. It's still time to avert a major catastrophe. The US is an armed society. Peace is better than out of control hostilities. We can all be friends.FourFaces
May 28, 2020
May
05
May
28
28
2020
06:27 PM
6
06
27
PM
PDT
1 3 4 5 6 7 8

Leave a Reply