Fauci E-mails and Honesty

[Robert]

[Grace]

Studies now show that hydroxychloroquine plus AZM improved survival of COVID patients by nearly 200%

https://c19hcq.com/

Yet Dr. Fauci told major news media outlets that hydroxychloroquine was actually dangerous when used against Covid 19. Hydroxychloroquine had been used safely for 65 years in millions of patients. This statement made headlines throughout the fake news media and it was a complete lie.

After doctor of death, Fauci’s statements on hydroxychloroquine, tech giants began censoring any mention of the drug. The media mocked the president and anyone who suggested the drug was safe and effective. According to A local doctor here in PA. some exemplary doctors who had practiced for many years, lost their license because they used hydroxychloroquine successfully to treat Covid patients.

One has to wonder how many thousands of people died needlessly because of Dr. Fauci’s guidance on the use of hydroxychloroquine for Covid patients in their early stages.

[Sudsy]

Boot wrote: "Alternatively, we could focus on the Kingdom of God and simply not spend our time on the latest partisan talking points."

You can always scroll by threads you find triggering. No one is forcing you to take the poll or even comment.

You do so because you feel you have something to say. And so do the others.

The kingdom of God is not divorced from the world in which it exists. The government has stretched it's bony fingers to disrupt one of the most sacred institutions of the church: the public gathering. It has bolstered its case for doing so through deceit.

It isn't a partisan issue at all. It is absolutely and fundamentally the purview of the church to cry foul.

Likewise, to what Boot said that we 'could focus on', no one needs to respond to another's post and can even screen out what others have to say with this 'foe option'. However, I appreciate reading those posts that challenge why we talk about the things we do. I have done this before and received no feedback, which is OK. As part of a thread, I think the challenge of why this is of importance to a Kingdom believer or need not be, is a good way to not get lost in the concerns of this world that are in our face constantly.

You posted 'The kingdom of God is not divorced from the world in which it exists.' If talking in marriage terms one could say we are to be more than divorced. That world that we were married to is now dead to us and we have married another.

How do you view 'turning the other cheek'. Isn't crying foul not doing that ? If one would say Paul cried foul when they were going against his Roman citizen rights, I don't see that as needing to 'turn the other cheek'. However, when our rights are temporarily suspended to gather as a church as we always have, I believe the testimony of a believer is strengthened by living the Kingdom life within the temporary restraints of the government. Especially when most people see these restraints as an attempt to save lives, whether it does or not. There are Christians in many countries that have to live and gather in far greater restraints than we have faced.

The question that comes to mind is what is the greater testimony to a Kingdom way of life. Crying foul or turning the other cheek and focusing on serving others with compassion.

And as was said earlier, one can put me on the 'foe list', read and not comment or comment, as long as that freedom exists. Hopefully, we can do this in a loving way to agree to disagree.

[ken_sylvania]

Studies now show that hydroxychloroquine plus AZM improved survival of COVID patients by nearly 200%

So if 90% of patients survive without treatment, a 200% improvement would mean that 270% of patients will survive with treatment. That's quite impressive.

[Bootstrap]

I think that's the approach many people took in the past, too, when I asked for evidence for their claims back then.

And examples were given ... and given ... and given. I am give out on giving examples.

Well, no. For the most part, most of these threads go just like this one. First page announces who the enemy is who is to be cancelled and suggests that there is really strong proof of their guilt. When asked, that information is not given, or if it is given and flaws are pointed out, well, people are offended. If nobody can give evidence that these emails show Fauci did something concerning, they dump on Fauci with other claims and videos and whatever, you can always bury the truth by changing the subject and throwing in more emotion.

We are now on page 10. Apparently, the claims that started this thread are untrue or nobody is actually interested in them.

It's worth asking what purpose this kind of thread serves. Based on the content, you would think it is mostly about making sure that political factionalism and conspiracy theories are reinforced as a central world view, repeating today's political talking points to reinforce political loyalties.

I think that's at odds with both the Kingdom of God and basic truthfulness. If it's about something else, this thread is not yet serving that other purpose.

Suppose every time someone starts a "cancel" thread, we all asked basic questions:

1. What accusation is being made about whom?
2. What evidence is given for the claim?
3. How solid is that evidence? Should we believe the claim?
4. What does this mean for us as Christians living where and when we do?

I think we would have very different discussions if we did that. Again, page 10 at this point. Perhaps we could start now?

[Josh]

Studies now show that hydroxychloroquine plus AZM improved survival of COVID patients by nearly 200%

https://c19hcq.com/

Yet Dr. Fauci told major news media outlets that hydroxychloroquine was actually dangerous when used against Covid 19. Hydroxychloroquine had been used safely for 65 years in millions of patients. This statement made headlines throughout the fake news media and it was a complete lie.

After doctor of death, Fauci’s statements on hydroxychloroquine, tech giants began censoring any mention of the drug. The media mocked the president and anyone who suggested the drug was safe and effective. According to A local doctor here in PA. some exemplary doctors who had practiced for many years, lost their license because they used hydroxychloroquine successfully to treat Covid patients.

One has to wonder how many thousands of people died needlessly because of Dr. Fauci’s guidance on the use of hydroxychloroquine for Covid patients in their early stages.

The powers that be had a complete lack of interest in any kind of treatment for COVID-19, other than putting people on ventilators. So we built temporary ICUs, floated hospital ships, and manufactured hundreds of thousands of ventilators, most of which went unused.

Given that everything else in America has always been cured with a drug, it's very surprising that COVID-19 never had any focus on that. But then again, if there had been an effective drug therapy - there wouldn't have been an excuse to kick 30% of people out of their jobs, shutter small businesses, and have the largest wealth transfer to the top 0.1%, would there have been?

[silentreader]

Studies now show that hydroxychloroquine plus AZM improved survival of COVID patients by nearly 200%

So if 90% of patients survive without treatment, a 200% improvement would mean that 270% of patients will survive with treatment. That's quite impressive.

In the same note...
Locally in our region our Covid infection rate is almost down to where it was when the mask mandate was legislated 51 weeks ago.
According to the statistics, the vast majority of infections occurred after the mask mandate was in place.
Despite this, statistics show that 97% of the regional population did not get Covid.
So if you get a vaccine which is only 95% effective, doesn't that put you at a greater risk?

[haithabu]

Studies now show that hydroxychloroquine plus AZM improved survival of COVID patients by nearly 200%

https://c19hcq.com/

Yet Dr. Fauci told major news media outlets that hydroxychloroquine was actually dangerous when used against Covid 19. Hydroxychloroquine had been used safely for 65 years in millions of patients. This statement made headlines throughout the fake news media and it was a complete lie.

After doctor of death, Fauci’s statements on hydroxychloroquine, tech giants began censoring any mention of the drug. The media mocked the president and anyone who suggested the drug was safe and effective. According to A local doctor here in PA. some exemplary doctors who had practiced for many years, lost their license because they used hydroxychloroquine successfully to treat Covid patients.

One has to wonder how many thousands of people died needlessly because of Dr. Fauci’s guidance on the use of hydroxychloroquine for Covid patients in their early stages.

If there is one thing which I see as the greatest evil to arise out of the response to the pandemic it is the apparent concerted campaign to suppress the use of promising candidates such as HCQ and Ivermectin for early treatment. In fact early treatment was all but ignored in favour of heroic measures in ICU. The message from the medical establishment to Covid victims amounted to "stay home and don't call us until you're ready to graduate to ventilator hell".

This caused great harm and loss of human lives not to mention crippling fear and forced societies into damaging draconian measures which may not have been necessary.

[Robert]

Well, no. For the most part, most of these threads go just like this one.

Well, no. Just look at he past few posts. Facts were shared. Care to speak to them or will you just wait a while then claim no one is posting facts? Kind of like, you seem to be doing what you are saying others are doing.

[Bootstrap]

Well, no. For the most part, most of these threads go just like this one.

Well, no. Just look at he past few posts. Facts were shared. Care to speak to them or will you just wait a while then claim no one is posting facts? Kind of like, you seem to be doing what you are saying others are doing.

Nope. And you just proved my point by selectively editing my post to hide what I had said, implying I had said something quite different. I'm trying to stick to the subject of this thread and suggesting that the honorable thing to do is to either provide facts for the claims from his emails or admit that the premise of this thread is false. Isn't that what honesty demands?

FWIW, that's also what I did in threads on HCQ. The only unifying theme here is hating on Fauci and dancing around the facts. If I address HCQ in this thread, people will just dance to another topic, that's why the original topic is no longer being discussed.

Here's the full paragraph you quoted from.

I think that's the approach many people took in the past, too, when I asked for evidence for their claims back then.

And examples were given ... and given ... and given. I am give out on giving examples.

Well, no. For the most part, most of these threads go just like this one. First page announces who the enemy is who is to be cancelled and suggests that there is really strong proof of their guilt. When asked, that information is not given, or if it is given and flaws are pointed out, well, people are offended. If nobody can give evidence that these emails show Fauci did something concerning, they dump on Fauci with other claims and videos and whatever, you can always bury the truth by changing the subject and throwing in more emotion.

We are now on page 10. Apparently, the claims that started this thread are untrue or nobody is actually interested in them.

It's worth asking what purpose this kind of thread serves. Based on the content, you would think it is mostly about making sure that political factionalism and conspiracy theories are reinforced as a central world view, repeating today's political talking points to reinforce political loyalties.

I think that's at odds with both the Kingdom of God and basic truthfulness. If it's about something else, this thread is not yet serving that other purpose.

Suppose every time someone starts a "cancel" thread, we all asked basic questions:

1. What accusation is being made about whom?
2. What evidence is given for the claim?
3. How solid is that evidence? Should we believe the claim?
4. What does this mean for us as Christians living where and when we do?

I think we would have very different discussions if we did that. Again, page 10 at this point. Perhaps we could start now?