Good news, Erik.
David: Even Wiki calls it far right and anti-Muslim (not anti-Islam). Here's a link to a Georgetown article on Gladstone:
https://bridge.georgetown.edu/research/factsheet-gatestone-institute/
As to the nonsensical rantings of the discredited Gordon Chang, speak with any distinguished academic whose field is China and see what they say. Chang uses the old trick of mixing a few facts with large helpings of his biased views.
Biased political views? You're using the Trains forum daily as though it were your own blog in furtherence of Israeli views, sometimes little more than agitprop.
Gatestone is not anti-Islam and is called such only by those who wish to excuse terrorism. One of their senior researchers is a religious Muslilm. Also, I think Conservative is a better term for it than "far-right," and I would have posted its real criticism of the way Trump first reacted to the news of the outbreak in China if I had not thought that it might be too political to post.
In the material I posted, is there anything about the collapse of China? Reduction of influence and reduction of ability to harm the USA is what I read, but this isnot the same as the collapse of their government.
Charlie, again you are simply calling names. If you have data contrary to what I posted from the Gatestone research or wish to point out what you can show to be conjecture, I'm always willing to listen and learn. But you seem unwilling to learn from anyone who isn't in lockstep witih your political positions.
I don't always agree with Gatestone. But I do think their analysis is correct in this case and agrees with others having a spectrum of political positions on other matters.
I am not attempting to defend all of Gatestone's positions or all those of the author I have quoted. Only the matter that I posted. which I believe is a fair analysss.
Having read "The Great Influenza" shortly after it was published, I am not surprised to hear that GWB picked up on it as he was was very involved with helping Africa deal with the HIV epidemic. FWIW, the book does not portray Woodrow Wilson in a good light.
News from the last 12 hours suggests that the US may be approaching the peak of the first wave. The Univ Of Wash model was updated last night to get a lot closer to reality with a substantial lowering of hospital resources needed (some areas are still going to be hit hard). Will be interesting to see what effect wearing mask will have, even if they work only 50% of the time, it will be an enourmous help.
Doubling time for cases in San Diego County was 5.5 days and new cases have been nearly flat for the last 5 days suggesting that growth is no longer exponential.
I don't think we can avoid COVID-19 from becoming endemic, in makes a strong case for a vaccination program.
I found this story of prescience quite interesting. Seems a shame now that other priorities managed to derail such forward thinking in the interim.
2005 prediction
The Gatestone Institute is a far-right organization, known for a strongly anti-Muslim bias. Gordon Chang is a lawyer and self-proclaimed China expert whose bias is well known. Since 2000 he has predicted with certainty the collapse of the Chinese government three times. Actual experts do not take his pronouncements seriously.
The virus is hitting China in a second wave. The second wave is claiming victims, including the Party's propaganda narratives. The most dangerous of these narratives is that ruler Xi Jinping, with heaven's mandate, has an obligation to dominate the international system.
To push America aside and seize global leadership, China got Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the World Health Organization, to say that China's response to the coronavirus showed the "superiority of the Chinese system and this experience is worthy of emulation by other countries." Then Beijing set about making a big show of "donating" medical equipment and diagnostic kits, most notably to stricken Europe.
Xi's initial policies turned a local outbreak into a pandemic, and now they are making even more people sick and forcing China into another pit of disease. China's inaccurate diagnostic kits and substandard protective gear donated around the world along with the new infections will show the truth: communism is incompetent if not downright malign.
China has "defeated" the coronavirus and declared "victory," Communist Party media tells us.
A funny thing happened on the way to victory, however. The virus is hitting China in a second wave. The second wave is claiming victims, including the Party's propaganda narratives.
China, after reporting no new infections on March 19, said the virus had been contained. Since then, Beijing has been reporting dozens of new cases each day but has maintained that virtually all of them were "imported" -- in other words, the infected were individuals arriving from other countries.
Of the very few in-country transmissions, most, Beijing maintained, were transmissions from the imported cases.
China's official numbers of deaths and new infections, however, must be bogus. Chinese officials are taking actions that are, as a practical matter, inconsistent with the no-new-infection reports.
For instance, on March 27 Beijing closed all theaters nationwide, after re-opening them just the previous week.
In Shanghai, tourist attractions that had just resumed operations were shut again. For instance, the municipality re-closed the observation deck of the Shanghai Tower, the tallest building in China, and the nearby Oriental Pearl Tower. The Jin Mao Tower is now shuttered "to further strengthen pandemic prevention and control." Madame Tussauds, the Shanghai Ocean Aquarium, and the Shanghai Haichang Ocean Park are now dark, along with the indoor portions of another 25 attractions.
Shanghai Disneyland? "Temporarily Closed Until Further Notice."
Shanghai is not the only metropolis turning out the lights. In Chengdu, karaoke bars and internet cafes were also shut just days after Sichuan province opened up all entertainment venues.
Fuyang in Anhui province ordered the closure of "entertainment spots" and indoor swimming pools. Henan province locked down internet cafes.
Henan even quarantined an entire area, Jia county, as doctors there tested positive for the bug.
On March 31, ESPN reported that the Chinese central government had delayed the resumption of team sports.
The nationwide university-entrance exams, the gaokao, have been postponed a month, to July.
The regime has also not rescheduled its premier political events, the annual meetings of the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, both originally scheduled for early March.
Finally, the authorities in Jiangxi province are not allowing people from next-door Hubei to enter, indicating they do not believe the epidemic in that disease-ridden province is over.
Does any of this matter? It does: Xi Jinping thinks he should rule the planet. "China, the country where the virus first appeared and claimed its first several thousand lives, is now using the global spread of the disease to bolster an increasingly vocal, assertive bid for global leadership that is exacerbating a yearslong conflict with the U.S.," the Wall Street Journal wrote on April 1.
As the Communist Party's Global Times on March 30 triumphantly put it, "COVID-19 Blunders Signal End of 'American Century.'"
To push America aside and seize global leadership, China got Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO), to say that China's response to the coronavirus showed the "superiority of the Chinese system and this experience is worthy of emulation by other countries." Then Beijing set about making a big show of "donating" medical equipment and diagnostic kits, most notably to stricken Europe.
Finally, Xi Jinping, beginning around the first week of February, forced China back to work to demonstrate that China had ended the epidemic.
None of these showy displays will convince anyone, however, if the virus ravages China again. Unfortunately for Xi, that is what is happening: people in China are re-infecting each other. For instance, in industrial Dongguan in southern Guangdong province, workers returning to their jobsites have been carrying the coronavirus, and this has forced health officials to quarantine other workers. China's leader can jump-start the economy or throttle the coronavirus, but he cannot do both at the same time.
When the second wave of coronavirus infections hits China hard, Xi Jinping's boasts about the superiority of Chinese communism will sound hollow, absurd even.
China can lie with statistics, but the virus gets the last word. "Victory" over both COVID-19 and the United States is far out of sight.
Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China and a Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow.
Everyone currently at the Yeshiva. married couples, some with children, and me, with the single youngsters all at home, is healthy and has not had contact with any known virus carrier. So we have not been tested.
The campus is large, and one does not feel confined. We practice social distancing, and pray outdoors with that in mind. The top teacher-rabbi also has an apartment on campus with his wife.
And one coiuple has adaopted me as a quasi member of their family, so I will enjoy a traditional Seder.
So Dave, I think you said you are "sheltered in place" and avoiding groups. Do they have testing for you or only if you have symptoms. Would I be correct that so far, you have no symptoms? Stay well my friend.
Overmod BaltACD Italy Deaths 15362 - Recovered 20996. While more have recovered than have died - I am not liking the ratio. But keep in mind that the Australian journalists noted that the Italians log their stats differently; anyone -- in a heavily geriatric population -- who dies while infected with the virus is tabulated as dying FROM infection with the virus. I suspect this is true for many patients with preexisting conditions and perhaps coinfection with other viruses; you may remember that in the United States the deaths "from" H1N1 influenza are about 100:1 vs. "COVID-19" and I see little operational reason at present either why the spread of influenza in Italy should be more restricted or that COVID-19 either predisposes against H1N1 infection or its symptoms "protect" against that (although both might be 'possible').
BaltACD Italy Deaths 15362 - Recovered 20996. While more have recovered than have died - I am not liking the ratio.
But keep in mind that the Australian journalists noted that the Italians log their stats differently; anyone -- in a heavily geriatric population -- who dies while infected with the virus is tabulated as dying FROM infection with the virus. I suspect this is true for many patients with preexisting conditions and perhaps coinfection with other viruses; you may remember that in the United States the deaths "from" H1N1 influenza are about 100:1 vs. "COVID-19" and I see little operational reason at present either why the spread of influenza in Italy should be more restricted or that COVID-19 either predisposes against H1N1 infection or its symptoms "protect" against that (although both might be 'possible').
Just like EHH changing how service metrics were derived and reported on CSX versus the rest of the industry.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDItaly Deaths 15362 - Recovered 20996. While more have recovered than have died - I am not liking the ratio.
That is not to claim that there isn't a dramatic risk of increase in sustained, and not just 'prompt', deaths in any actual outbreak of COVID-19 that follows a failure of social distancing. We see evidence of this in Israel precisely in the segments of the community that imperfectly practice it. I expect to see evidence of it repeatedly in the United States anywhere the carefully -- and properly self-enforced -- segregation attempts break down or might 'have to be' suspended. And it is a very long way, according to our expert sources, before the contemplated methods of actually ending the risk to the actual people 'at risk' will have succeeded well enough, and pervasively enough, to lift the social-distancing precautions.
Long before that I expect to see the more 'correct' response enacted, which is more careful and systematic isolation of the parts of the population at actual risk, and then selective return to more normal societal interaction and operation. The importance of nonintrusive testing for 'acquired immunity' (e.g. presence of serological evidence or no infectious shed combined with sustained absence of symptoms) will be significant in that, as the current "testing" is laughable when you actually look at its reliability statistics. Unfortunately there is no particular guarantee ... and this was reinforced by two 'we don't know' scientists as recently as yesterday ... that there will be no repeated 'waves' of repeated ARDS-inducing novel clones, as there memorably were in the 1918-20 H1N1 pandemic. So institutionalization of correct rapid response actually has to be made on an ongoing basis, not just the expedient buck-passing and cheap-to-fit science that had characterized our response to, say the secret contemporary H1N1 pandemic right up to the snowballing of the COVID-19 reaction.
Some of the Meme's one is tending to see are trumpeting the number 'recovered' instead of deaths.
Most recent Johns Hopkins report - Italy Deaths 15362 - Recovered 20996. While more have recovered than have died - I am not liking the ratio.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html
BaltACD According to the Johns Hopkins reporting https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html Timor-Leste (wherever that is) has a single confirmed case.
According to the Johns Hopkins reporting
Timor-Leste (wherever that is) has a single confirmed case.
Johnny
Trying to settle the argument as to how the problem started and without denying that the USA could have done better than it did:
Correct translation above
Al Quds is Arabic for the Holy (one) = Jerusalem.
Some postings back on this thread, I was asked about the transfer of medocal supplies to Gaza. Confirming my reply in greater detail, the following is official:
In times of trouble, often a bit of humor helps. So, duplicating from the Classic Trains Journey to Destiny thread, Father Frank Browne SJ's photo inside a new diesel railcar wirh a roof leak:
In the 2014 Ebola outbreak, close to 30 000 individuals developed Ebola viral disease (EVD), and numerous therapies were tested against this virus, including chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, favipiravir, brincidofovir, monoclonal antibodies, antisense RNA, and convalescent plasma, among many others. With such a large number of therapeutic interventions given to affected patients, the goal was to determine which was efficacious against Ebola. Ultimately, none proved to be efficacious or safe.
Why were new therapies not discovered? One reason is because virtually all studies were single-group interventions without concurrent controls, which led to no definitive conclusion related to efficacy or safety. Despite much resistance and controversy regarding asking patients with EVD to participate in a randomized clinical trial (RCT),1 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) conducted the first and only RCT during that outbreak. It took several months to design the trial, but it was implemented and successfully launched during the outbreak; however, it was too late for the RCT to be completed.2 This tragedy of not discovering new therapies during an outbreak cannot be repeated.
The world is now facing a pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the cause of COVID-19), for which no proven specific therapies are available, other than supportive care. In China, and now Italy, France, and Spain, a large number of patients have received off-label and compassionate use therapies such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir-ritonavir, favipiravir, remdesivir, ribavirin, interferon, convalescent plasma, steroids, and anti–IL-6 inhibitors, based on either their in vitro antiviral or anti-inflammatory properties. These therapies have been mostly given without controls, except for a few randomized trials started in China, and more recently in the US.3
Although many drugs have in vitro activity against different coronaviruses, no clinical evidence currently supports the efficacy and safety of any drug against any coronavirus in humans, including SARS-CoV-2. Numerous drugs that have been highly promising in vitro for other infectious diseases have failed in clinical studies. If in vitro activity automatically translated into clinical activity, more antimicrobial drugs for all kinds of infectious diseases would be available. Yet, there are published case reports of old and new drugs with in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 that have been given to patients but without a comparison control group. The administration of any unproven drug as a “last resort” wrongly assumes that benefit will be more likely than harm. However, when a drug with unknown clinical effects is given to patients who have severe illness from a new disease (like COVID-19), there is no way to know whether the patients had benefited or were harmed if they were not compared to a concurrent control group. A common interpretation of off-label use and compassionate use of drugs is that is that if the patient died, they died from the disease, but if the patient survived, they survived because of the given drug. This is not true.
As a practical example, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir-ritonavir have a variety of adverse effects, including QT prolongation, torsades de pointes, hepatitis, acute pancreatitis, neutropenia, and anaphylaxis. Considering that most patients who have died from COVID-19 were elderly and had cardiovascular comorbidities and that affected patients frequently have cardiac arrhythmias,4,5 chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir-ritonavir could potentially increase the risk of cardiac death. Additionally, hepatitis and neutropenia are clinical manifestations of COVID-19, and both hepatic and bone marrow dysfunction could be made worse by the off-label use of these drugs; thus, it would be impossible to differentiate the drug-related adverse effects from the disease manifestations in the absence of a control group.
Compassionate use of drugs that have not been previously approved for clinical use (eg, remdesivir) could cause serious adverse effects that were not previously detected because of the very small number of exposed patients. With respect to anti-inflammatory therapy, the use of intravenous steroids has been associated with delayed coronavirus clearance in both blood and lungs with MERS-CoV6 and SARS-CoV,7 and steroids were associated with significantly increased risk of mortality and secondary infections in patients with influenza.8 Furthermore, even low-dose steroids have shown harm in patients with sepsis, and IL-6 inhibitors may cause even more profound immunosuppression than steroids, increasing the risk of sepsis, bacterial pneumonia, gastrointestinal perforation, and hepatotoxicity.9,10 Yet, despite substantial evidence of potential harm, steroids and IL-6 inhibitors are now being given to patients with COVID-19 in several countries. Accordingly, even for treatments previously utilized in other diseases, it is critical to evaluate these drugs in studies that have a concurrent control group.
A control group may be defined as the standard of care with or without placebo. One concern during epidemics, for example, during the 2014 Ebola outbreak (and the current COVID-19 pandemic), is whether it is ethical to give patients a placebo. If the disease is not 100% lethal and it is not known whether the experimental drug would help or harm a patient (ie, a situation with true equipoise), then it is ethical to conduct an RCT. Without a control group, it is not possible to accurately determine the harms of any experimental drug. In reality, the placebo group will always be safer (regarding adverse effects) than the experimental group because patients in the placebo group will receive the established standard of care. In contrast, compared with RCTs, the administration of old or new drugs (eg, off-label use, compassionate use, single-group cohorts, case-historical controls, clinical trials without controls) may be less safe, and moreover, will not lead to the discovery of any new therapy.
In addition to the risk of harming patients without the possibility to even detect the magnitude of harm, the administration of off-label drug use, compassionate drug use, and uncontrolled studies during a pandemic also could discourage patients and clinicians from participating in RCTs, hampering any knowledge that could be gained about the effects of the drug being tested. More than 300 000 individuals have been diagnosed with COVID-19; however, just a few hundred have been offered participation in RCTs. Meanwhile, many more patients have been offered uncontrolled drugs.
It is imperative to discover new therapies, otherwise there will be no proven treatments for future coronavirus pandemics. By participating in an RCT, both patients and clinicians can benefit from the unique opportunity to directly contribute to the discovery of new therapies, and also from the safer monitoring process in the conduct of clinical trials compared with uncontrolled drug administration (whereby safety cannot be determined). Optimally, during an outbreak, the type of RCTs that should be prioritized are ones with an adaptive design, which are able to rapidly accept or reject multiple experimental therapies throughout the trial, while being adequately powered for meaningful clinical outcomes.
With the current COVID-19 pandemic, RCTs have been launched around the world, including an adaptive trial sponsored by the NIH.3 This unprecedented speed from concept to implementation in just a few weeks is noteworthy and provides proof that clinical trials can be promptly initiated even in the middle of a pandemic. The rapid and simultaneous combination of supportive care and RCTs is the only way to find effective and safe treatments for COVID-19 and any other future outbreak.
Corresponding Author: Andre C. Kalil, MD, MPH, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 95400 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68135 (akalil@unmc.edu).
Published Online: March 24, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.4742
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
[quote user="charlie hebdo"]
The trouble with an infrastructure program is it only benefits the construction industry now. And it takes months to kick in. By then, the normal economic forces will be operating. And the worst boondoggles and pork are bipartisan. You conveniently omitted Alaska and its GOP senator's "bridge to nowhere"?
Your example would fall under #3 of my post. Just like the "Big Dig" was somewhat Bi-partisan since there was a Rep. Gov. in Mass. for part of it's construction.
alphas GERALD L MCFARLANE JR The fastest way to recover from any economic slowdown, especially one caused by natural forces, is to spend money on construction. Something even the Donald should know well, and someone needs to tell Rep. Kevin McCarthy(R-Bakersfield, CA) this as apparently he's balking at a third recovery measure that would do just that...funnel billions upon billions into construction projects nationwide. This is the time to fund, Gateway, Portal, the complete CAHSR and any other rail related projects. If they're talking about another Trillion dollar bill for infrastructure, split it 3 ways between the 3 major forms of land transportaion, rail, air and highway(I'd use all that money to repair the 1000+ bridges across the U.S. highway system myself). That would be roughly 333 Billion per mode of travel, that would easily kickstart the economy and get us rolling again ASAP. But only if this is handled differently than what Obama did with his which basically wasted much of the money. 1. Eliminate any chance that it could be used to pay government workers instead of being used for construction and/or repare. Way too much of it was used for this mainly in the blue states and all it did was delay the inevitable for a few years until the funds ran out and then the government employees were terminated. 2. Eliminate the Obama requirement that only union labor could be employed. The majority of states don't have that many union contractors which is why they couldn't take advantage of the Obama stimulus. The Davis-Bacon Act will still apply to drive the labor costs up (unfortunately as that will result in less projects than if it didn't apply) and if the unions can't successfully compete with that its too bad. 3. Make absolutely sure that the Federal Government does not get caught up in any "Big Dig" situations once again. The best way to do that is the Feds only commit to a certain amount per project and the states are responsible for overruns. If a state won't agree to that then they don't get the money. 4. Eliminate or suspend some of the requirements that delay even minor construction projects forever. Otherwise it could be years before any results occur. 5. Construction only projects. If Pelossi tries again to play politics, then tell the country loud and repeatedly you want to do it but she's trying to once attach unrelated items such as Planned Parenthood funding, etc. that have nothing to do with the country recovering from the financial crisis. I'm with those that say the major focus should be on highways and bridges, with rail and air getting some but not equal amounts . The normal highway bridge project (not the large bridges over wide rivers) are fairly easy to start and not that controversial when it comes to the environment. They can probably get going on them without much delay. The majority of them now use pre-cast concrete spans so they can be built much faster. The rail tunnels in the NY area are not something the rest of the country considers a high priority so trying to hold up the bill in order to get too much support for them won't go well. Get what you can for their construction from the Feds and NY & NJ make up the rest including the inevitable overruns.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR The fastest way to recover from any economic slowdown, especially one caused by natural forces, is to spend money on construction. Something even the Donald should know well, and someone needs to tell Rep. Kevin McCarthy(R-Bakersfield, CA) this as apparently he's balking at a third recovery measure that would do just that...funnel billions upon billions into construction projects nationwide. This is the time to fund, Gateway, Portal, the complete CAHSR and any other rail related projects. If they're talking about another Trillion dollar bill for infrastructure, split it 3 ways between the 3 major forms of land transportaion, rail, air and highway(I'd use all that money to repair the 1000+ bridges across the U.S. highway system myself). That would be roughly 333 Billion per mode of travel, that would easily kickstart the economy and get us rolling again ASAP.
The fastest way to recover from any economic slowdown, especially one caused by natural forces, is to spend money on construction. Something even the Donald should know well, and someone needs to tell Rep. Kevin McCarthy(R-Bakersfield, CA) this as apparently he's balking at a third recovery measure that would do just that...funnel billions upon billions into construction projects nationwide. This is the time to fund, Gateway, Portal, the complete CAHSR and any other rail related projects. If they're talking about another Trillion dollar bill for infrastructure, split it 3 ways between the 3 major forms of land transportaion, rail, air and highway(I'd use all that money to repair the 1000+ bridges across the U.S. highway system myself). That would be roughly 333 Billion per mode of travel, that would easily kickstart the economy and get us rolling again ASAP.
1. Eliminate any chance that it could be used to pay government workers instead of being used for construction and/or repare. Way too much of it was used for this mainly in the blue states and all it did was delay the inevitable for a few years until the funds ran out and then the government employees were terminated.
2. Eliminate the Obama requirement that only union labor could be employed. The majority of states don't have that many union contractors which is why they couldn't take advantage of the Obama stimulus. The Davis-Bacon Act will still apply to drive the labor costs up (unfortunately as that will result in less projects than if it didn't apply) and if the unions can't successfully compete with that its too bad.
3. Make absolutely sure that the Federal Government does not get caught up in any "Big Dig" situations once again. The best way to do that is the Feds only commit to a certain amount per project and the states are responsible for overruns. If a state won't agree to that then they don't get the money.
4. Eliminate or suspend some of the requirements that delay even minor construction projects forever. Otherwise it could be years before any results occur.
5. Construction only projects. If Pelossi tries again to play politics, then tell the country loud and repeatedly you want to do it but she's trying to once attach unrelated items such as Planned Parenthood funding, etc. that have nothing to do with the country recovering from the financial crisis.
I'm with those that say the major focus should be on highways and bridges, with rail and air getting some but not equal amounts . The normal highway bridge project (not the large bridges over wide rivers) are fairly easy to start and not that controversial when it comes to the environment. They can probably get going on them without much delay. The majority of them now use pre-cast concrete spans so they can be built much faster. The rail tunnels in the NY area are not something the rest of the country considers a high priority so trying to hold up the bill in order to get too much support for them won't go well. Get what you can for their construction from the Feds and NY & NJ make up the rest including the inevitable overruns.
[quote user="GERALD L MCFARLANE JR"]
Possibly by the time the plague is over, the entire World population will be immune to the Cononavirus. Those that have recovered will have their own immunity and the rest of the population will have received a safe and effective innoculation. This is srill a possibility, and the steps to this have been noted in earlier postings.
The Israeli humanitarian aid organization IsraAID is providing support to frontline medical professionals and volunteers in the organization’s emergency units responding to the coronavirus crisis in Italy with the launch of webinars on stress management, psychological first aid and community resilience, it was announced on Tuesday.
IsraAID is working in partnership with La Deputazione Ebraica di Roma, the welfare organization of Rome’s Jewish community, to offer ongoing supervision and guidance, and support to locally led relief activities. Its webinars focus on self-care and ways of coping with stress, and are tailored to the specific needs of frontline workers.
Italy is one of the most affected countries by the COVID-19 pandemic, with more than 100,000 cases and more than 11,500 deaths.
IsraAID has maintained close ties with partner organizations in Italy, including in the Jewish community, since its work in the country from 2016 to 2019, following the August 2016 earthquake in Central Italy that killed 299 people.
“We hope to bolster that in whatever way we can,” he said.
Convicted One Euclid So the new way of travel will be not to travel. We are leaving the service economy and entering the brave new, "Stay home economy."
Euclid So the new way of travel will be not to travel. We are leaving the service economy and entering the brave new, "Stay home economy."
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.