• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: Origins of Covid (2)

I will just repeat something I have said a few times already. It's not conspiratorial per se to think that the virus began in a lab, and it is possible that some kind of lab incident did cause the pandemic. Because of this, I think it is too strong to state categorically that the pandemic began in nature.

That said, and again, to repeat, much of the arguments for a lab leak are either conspiracy theories, or unparsimonious, or both, with many of the conspiracy theories quickly relying on an ever-expanding cover-up across multiple entities in different countries, often relying on evidence that support different proposed routes for the pandemic to start, or even contradictory evidence. The lab leak theorists often appear to be agnostic or not even concerned how the virus leaked from a lab, or which lab it was supposed to have leaked from, whether any tampering of the virus occurred, whether the Chinese military were involved, whether it was simply caught in the wild and escaped as it was, or whether it was made more virulent, or more transmissable through serial passaging etc... the emails seem to be read as either confessions, or claims that they knew, but with the presumption that what they really thought was discussed outside of these Slack channels, emails etc...

I suggest listening to the TWIV episode linked to above.

Basically, if it were a virus created or modified in the lab, there would evidence in the virus itself. If it were a leak, then there would be evidence in the way the virus first spread. Instead, the evidence supports the Wuhan market as the origin, not a lab.
 
I suggest listening to the TWIV episode linked to above.

Basically, if it were a virus created or modified in the lab, there would evidence in the virus itself. If it were a leak, then there would be evidence in the way the virus first spread. Instead, the evidence supports the Wuhan market as the origin, not a lab.

Yes, I know. I linked to the video myself so I have watched and listened to it.

Indeed, the evidence strongly favours the market emergence. That said it is not a conspiracy theory per se, that it could have leaked from a lab. As I have said, the arguments on offer for the lab leak almost always require some kind of conspiracy and those conspiracy theories often require a larger and larger collusion of more and more entities and individuals which diminishes the credence we should give them.
 
An interesting study documented many potential (human) viral pathogens in animals from fur farms, including a novel bat coronavirus, and a number of flu viruses including the first mammalian isolate of AH6N2 avian flu.

Animals such as raccoon dogs, mink and muskrats are farmed for fur and are sometimes used as food or medicinal products1,2, yet they are also potential reservoirs of emerging pathogens3. Here we performed single-sample metatranscriptomic sequencing of internal tissues from 461 individual fur animals that were found dead due to disease. We characterized 125 virus species, including 36 that were novel and 39 at potentially high risk of cross-species transmission, including zoonotic spillover. Notably, we identified seven species of coronaviruses, expanding their known host range, and documented the cross-species transmission of a novel canine respiratory coronavirus to raccoon dogs and of bat HKU5-like coronaviruses to mink, present at a high abundance in lung tissues. Three subtypes of influenza A virus—H1N2, H5N6 and H6N2—were detected in the lungs of guinea pig, mink and muskrat, respectively. Multiple known zoonotic viruses, such as Japanese encephalitis virus and mammalian orthoreovirus4,5, were detected in guinea pigs. Raccoon dogs and mink carried the highest number of potentially high-risk viruses, while viruses from the Coronaviridae, Paramyxoviridae and Sedoreoviridae families commonly infected multiple hosts. These data also reveal potential virus transmission between farmed animals and wild animals, and from humans to farmed animals, indicating that fur farming represents an important transmission hub for viral zoonoses.
Zhao, J., Wan, W., Yu, K. et al. Farmed fur animals harbour viruses with zoonotic spillover potential. Nature (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07901-3

Although not direct evidence of a zoonotic source of SARS-C0V-2 it certainly supports the possibility.
 
How many actual bat coronaviruses do you think they ever found?

China is the only country WIV searched for bat coronaviruses, and China being a large country, only a very small part of China.


Sorry for the late reply. They had samples from all over the world- as would be natural for their studies.
Something called "mailing them" from other researchers.
 
Sorry for the late reply. They had samples from all over the world- as would be natural for their studies.
Something called "mailing them" from other researchers.

References please.

Since WIV were the only laboratory prior to SARS-CoV-2 to have isolated actual viable bat corona viruses your statement that viruses were mailed in from all over the world would seem to be a falsehood*.

It is unhelpful for a discussion on a skeptic site to have contributions made by people posting untrue statements.

Most importantly, we report the first recorded isolation of a live SL-CoV (bat SL-CoV-WIV1)
Ge, XY., Li, JL., Yang, XL. et al. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature 503, 535–538 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12711
Is the first isolate of a viable bat CoV, subsequent teams have isolated bat Cov but only post 2020 e.g.
Here we report the isolation of a new SL-CoV strain, named bat SL-CoV WIV16. SL-CoV WIV16 was isolated from a single fecal sample of Rhinolophus sinicus, which was collected in Kunming, Yunnan Province, in July 2013.
Yang XL, Hu B, Wang B, Wang MN, Zhang Q, Zhang W, Wu LJ, Ge XY, Zhang YZ, Daszak P, Wang LF, Shi ZL. Isolation and Characterization of a Novel Bat Coronavirus Closely Related to the Direct Progenitor of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. J Virol. 2015 Dec 30;90(6):3253-6. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02582-15. PMID: 26719272; PMCID: PMC4810638.

The second report of a isolation of a bat CoV also by WIV.

Most reports of isolation are only of genomes NOT viable viruses e.g. from Laos 2022 where they isolated several genomes but only one viable virus (this was the first team other than WIV to isolate a viable bat CoV.
A total of 645 bats belonging to 6 families and 46 species were captured (Supplementary Table 1). Two hundred and forty-seven blood samples, 608 saliva, 539 anal/faecal and 157 urine swabs were collected from bats in the northern part of Laos (Supplementary Table 2). We first screened all 539 faecal samples through a pan-coronavirus nested RT-PCR analysis20. Overall, 24 individuals of 10 species were positive, and 1 individual (BANAL-27) was concomitantly infected by an alphacoronavirus and a betacoronavirus
....
Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and Sanger sequencing were used to obtain a complete genomic sequence of five of the seven sarbecoviruses (Fig. 1 and Supplementary Table 4). The coverage of the genome of the remaining two sarbecoviruses (BANAL-27 and BANAL-242 sampled from R. pusillus and R. malayanus bats, respectively) was 90%; therefore, they were not included in the final analyses
...
To isolate infectious viruses, rectal swabs were inoculated on VeroE6 cells. No cytopathic effect (CPE) was observed 3 and 4 days after infection, but viral RNAs were detected for one of the two wells inoculated with the BANAL-236 sample (cycle threshold (Ct) = 25.1 at day 3, Ct = 21.7 at day 4). The culture supernatant (C1) formed plaques on VeroE6 and the titre was 3,800 pfu ml−1. A C2 viral stock was prepared by amplification on VeroE6 at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 10−4. The culture supernatant was collected on day 4 when CPE was observed and titrated on VeroE6 (Extended Data Fig. 9). The plaques’ phenotype was small, but the titre reached 2.6.106 pfu ml−1. The random NGS performed on the RNA extracted from this stock confirmed that the culture was pure and corresponded to the BANAL-236 virus, without any non-synonymous mutations between the original BANAL-236 genome and the C2 viral stock. Replication of BANAL-236 in VeroE6 was efficiently inhibited by soluble hACE2, thus showing that entry and propagation was largely ACE2 dependent (Fig. 4c and Extended Data Fig. 9). Furthermore, BANAL-236 replicated in human cell lines expressing endogenous levels of ACE2, Calu-3 and Caco-2 (Fig. 4c). The kinetics of RNA synthesis were slower compared to those for SARS-CoV-2. Infectious viral particles were produced at day 4 in the supernatant of Caco-2 and Calu-3 cells (respectively 104.7 and 102.9 pfu ml−1).
Yang XL, Hu B, Wang B, Wang MN, Zhang Q, Zhang W, Wu LJ, Ge XY, Zhang YZ, Daszak P, Wang LF, Shi ZL. Isolation and Characterization of a Novel Bat Coronavirus Closely Related to the Direct Progenitor of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. J Virol. 2015 Dec 30;90(6):3253-6. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02582-15. PMID: 26719272; PMCID: PMC4810638.

Although published 2023 the third report from WIV was based on work up to 2019, and reported three more viable virus isolated bringing the total to five worldwide all from WIV.

Here, we further optimized our methods for propagating clade 2 sarbecoviruses in culture for viral isolation from field samples. We successfully isolated one clade 2 RBD sarbecovirus as well as two new clade 1 RBD sarbecoviruses from Rhinolophus sinicus fecal samples collected between 2012 and 2019, showing that the higher trypsin level used is compatible with both ACE2-dependent and ACE2-independent sarbecoviruses. Electron microscopy of virions showed that the spike density on clade 2 virions may vary from clade 1 RBD sarbecoviruses. This new sarbecovirus isolation protocol increases the chance of viral isolation from field samples and has extended our ability to explore and understand the biological features of less studied sarbecoviruses in the laboratory.
Guo H, Li A, Dong T, Si H, Hu B, Li B, Zhu Y, Shi Z, Letko M. 2023. Isolation of ACE2-dependent and -independent sarbecoviruses from Chinese horseshoe bats. J Virol 97:e00395-23.
https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.00395-23

The isolation of four bat coV from Japan was in 2022 and as the authors say
Despite surveillance-based genetic detection of numerous bat sarbecoviruses, cultivable viruses have been rarely isolated to date, leading to the application of a pseudovirus system as described above to analyze their entry mechanisms into cells. Receptor selectivity assessed in this system does not necessarily correspond to functional receptor specificity of intact bat sarbecovirus (11), emphasizing the need for cultivable virus for assessment of its spillover potential of bat sarbecoviruses. We report detection, isolation, and genetic and biologic characterization of cultivable bat sarbecoviruses from several locations in Japan.
Murakami S, Kitamura T, Matsugo H, Kamiki H, Oyabu K, Sekine W, Takenaka-Uema A, Sakai-Tagawa Y, Kawaoka Y, Horimoto T. Isolation of Bat Sarbecoviruses, Japan. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022 Dec;28(12):2500-2503. doi: 10.3201/eid2812.220801. PMID: 36417954; PMCID: PMC9707576.

* If you can provide evidence other than an assertion to support your statement please do. Note this is for physical virus isolates NOT gene sequences.
 
Last edited:
References please.

Since WIV were the only laboratory prior to SARS-CoV-2 to have isolated actual viable bat corona viruses your statement that viruses were mailed in from all over the world would seem to be a falsehood*.

It is unhelpful for a discussion on a skeptic site to have contributions made by people posting untrue statements.


Ge, XY., Li, JL., Yang, XL. et al. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature 503, 535–538 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12711
Is the first isolate of a viable bat CoV, subsequent teams have isolated bat Cov but only post 2020 e.g.
Yang XL, Hu B, Wang B, Wang MN, Zhang Q, Zhang W, Wu LJ, Ge XY, Zhang YZ, Daszak P, Wang LF, Shi ZL. Isolation and Characterization of a Novel Bat Coronavirus Closely Related to the Direct Progenitor of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. J Virol. 2015 Dec 30;90(6):3253-6. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02582-15. PMID: 26719272; PMCID: PMC4810638.

The second report of a isolation of a bat CoV also by WIV.

Most reports of isolation are only of genomes NOT viable viruses e.g. from Laos 2022 where they isolated several genomes but only one viable virus (this was the first team other than WIV to isolate a viable bat CoV.

Yang XL, Hu B, Wang B, Wang MN, Zhang Q, Zhang W, Wu LJ, Ge XY, Zhang YZ, Daszak P, Wang LF, Shi ZL. Isolation and Characterization of a Novel Bat Coronavirus Closely Related to the Direct Progenitor of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. J Virol. 2015 Dec 30;90(6):3253-6. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02582-15. PMID: 26719272; PMCID: PMC4810638.

Although published 2023 the third report from WIV was based on work up to 2019, and reported three more viable virus isolated bringing the total to five worldwide all from WIV.


Guo H, Li A, Dong T, Si H, Hu B, Li B, Zhu Y, Shi Z, Letko M. 2023. Isolation of ACE2-dependent and -independent sarbecoviruses from Chinese horseshoe bats. J Virol 97:e00395-23.
https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.00395-23

The isolation of four bat coV from Japan was in 2022 and as the authors say

Murakami S, Kitamura T, Matsugo H, Kamiki H, Oyabu K, Sekine W, Takenaka-Uema A, Sakai-Tagawa Y, Kawaoka Y, Horimoto T. Isolation of Bat Sarbecoviruses, Japan. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022 Dec;28(12):2500-2503. doi: 10.3201/eid2812.220801. PMID: 36417954; PMCID: PMC9707576.

* If you can provide evidence other than an assertion to support your statement please do. Note this is for physical virus isolates NOT gene sequences.

What you report here is that viruses collected were not from a 'small area of china'. Also that all reporting was from ..where? Oh China. China is a bastion for true scientific disclosure within their military run and government virus based laboratories /end.

*and neither does the US disclose who co funded all of it, the $$$$ are there in the documents. SO, If you believe this load of bollocks, you'll believe anything.

Let me sell you my new book on ufo sightings and big foot.
 
Last edited:
What you report here is that viruses collected were not from a 'small area of china'. Also that all reporting was from ..where? Oh China. China is a bastion for true scientific disclosure within their military run and government virus based laboratories /end.

*and neither does the US disclose who co funded all of it, the $$$$ are there in the documents. SO, If you believe this load of bollocks, you'll believe anything.

Let me sell you my new book on ufo sightings and big foot.

Oh, are you Michael Shellenberger?

He found out the names of the scientists who got sick with Covid at the WIV from anonymous sources who apparently don't want to go on public record. Similarly, anonymous sources have also told him about alien spacecraft and bodies that the Deep State is covering up.

It's kind of amazing, really, how people will pass along these secrets to credulous... er... credible journalists while not wanting the secret to get too public.
 
What you report here is that viruses collected were not from a 'small area of china'. Also that all reporting was from ..where? Oh China. China is a bastion for true scientific disclosure within their military run and government virus based laboratories /end.

*and neither does the US disclose who co funded all of it, the $$$$ are there in the documents. SO, If you believe this load of bollocks, you'll believe anything.

Let me sell you my new book on ufo sightings and big foot.

At least you recognise that your comment about viruses being sent in to WIV from all over the world has as much evidence to support it as claims about UFOs existing and Big Foot being real.

Do you accept that as of 2020 the only people to report isolating physical viable SARS like corona viruses from bats were WIV, and they reported five viruses none of which could have been a precursor for SARS-CoV-2. That those five viruses were all isolated from bats in the same area of China. If you insist other teams elsewhere in the world had isolated physical viable SARS like corona viruses from bats why have they kept this secret and not published a description of the viruses isolated?
 
A new paper on the origins of Covid has just been published. It looks like it has already been through peer-review, so it is not a pre-print.

Many of the authors will be familiar to those who have been following this saga.

In particular, Worobey, Pekar, Garry, Holmes, Koopmans, Rambaut, Andersen, and Florence Debarre is in the mentor role on the paper.

The lead writer is Alexander Crits-Christoph who is an "independent researcher". That part is somewhat unusual, IMHO.

Anyway, the summary of this paper is...

Summary
Zoonotic spillovers of viruses have occurred through the animal trade worldwide. The start of the COVID-19 pandemic was traced epidemiologically to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. Here, we analyze environmental qPCR and sequencing data collected in the Huanan market in early 2020. We demonstrate that market-linked severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genetic diversity is consistent with market emergence and find increased SARS-CoV-2 positivity near and within a wildlife stall. We identify wildlife DNA in all SARS-CoV-2-positive samples from this stall, including species such as civets, bamboo rats, and raccoon dogs, previously identified as possible intermediate hosts. We also detect animal viruses that infect raccoon dogs, civets, and bamboo rats. Combining metagenomic and phylogenetic approaches, we recover genotypes of market animals and compare them with those from farms and other markets. This analysis provides the genetic basis for a shortlist of potential intermediate hosts of SARS-CoV-2 to prioritize for serological and viral sampling.

Link

Of course, the usual critics have written a letter to the editors demanding a retraction of this paper.

Among them are Jay Bhattacharya, the guy behind the GBD who got a lot of ideas about Covid dead wrong, some guy who also seems to think that Omicron spread by human manipulation, Steven Quay, Ebright and Nickels from Rutgers, etc...

They come across more and more as similar to 9/11 Truthers. One example is how they claim that the papers arguing for a specific market origin must be wrong because there are several other papers that claim different times. Sure, but all those other papers cannot ALL be right - if one argues the emergence was in August, you cannot simultaneously argue it was in October. Yet that kind of scattergun argument is exactly the type being made in this letter.

Link
 
There is a conference just down the road from me happening today and for the next couple of days with one of the topics being the origins of Covid.


Some fairly big names on the list:


Invited Speakers:



Jesse Bloom, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
Wendy Burgers, University of Cape Town

Yunlong Cao, Peking University

Christian Drosten, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin

George Fu Gao, Institute of Microbiology, CAS
Ravindra Gupta, University of Cambridge

Edward Holmes, The University of Sydney
Clare Jolly, University College London

Vineet Menachery, The University of Texas Medical Branch

Melanie Ott, University of California, San Francisco

Stanly Perlman, University of Iowa

Stefan Pöhlmann, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen

Lit Man Leo Poon, The University of Hong Kong

David Robertson, University of Glasgow
Kei Sato, The University of Tokyo

Olivier Schwartz, Institut Pasteur

Zhengli Shi, Guangzhou Laboratory
Alex Sigal, Africa Health Research Institute

Cherilyn Sirois, Cell Press

Volker Thiel, University of Bern

Greg Towers, University College London

Linfa Wang, Duke-NUS Medical School
Xiangxi Wang, Institute of Biophysics, CAS

Jincun Zhao, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
 
The Select Subcommittee of the Coronavirus Pandemic has released its report...

I see that one expert opinion they rely on is,
In September 2024, Mr. Boris Johnson, former British Prime Minister, stated his belief that the COVID-19 pandemic originated via a laboratory or research related accident in Wuhan.
So that pretty much tells me how well evidence based this report is.
 
I see that one expert opinion they rely on is,

So that pretty much tells me how well evidence based this report is.
How dare you! Marjorie Taylor Greene is on that committee! No way would she be interested in anything but the most rigorous science.
 
I came here to hopefully see if there was ANY water to this report....I think the old JREF would have had a word by word breakdown of it...It sure looks like its just republican fantasy, but who knows...Sad I have to go to genocide Apologetics al jazeera to read a summary :(
 
I came here to hopefully see if there was ANY water to this report....I think the old JREF would have had a word by word breakdown of it...It sure looks like its just republican fantasy, but who knows...Sad I have to go to genocide Apologetics al jazeera to read a summary :(
I don't know what to say. Much of the report has been covered throughout this thread. I used to write quite a lot about this, but it seems that few people are interested, and quite often people will turn up in the thread to complain that there is nothing new in the posts, which is true.

In my opinion, this committee has no evidence to support most of its claims, and that it is basically a partisan hack job.

There is no evidence of a precursor virus in the Wuhan lab, still less for Fauci having funded the creation of SARS-CoV2.

The complaints about the FDA discouraging people from turning to ivermectin is a stupid sideline. Apparently some idiots are upset because the FDA effectively mocked people who claimed that ivermectin was a cure or a prophylactic for Covid.


When it comes to masks, there is something infuriating about this. In Japan, people universally masked up, and I am pretty sure that that, plus a kind of soft lockdown slowed the spread of the virus.

I would also suggest that the fact that flu almost completely dropped off during the Covid years indicates masking and social distancing must have done something.
 
The complaints about the FDA discouraging people from turning to ivermectin is a stupid sideline. Apparently some idiots are upset because the FDA effectively mocked people who claimed that ivermectin was a cure or a prophylactic for Covid.
I can't believe the weirdos are still trying to push ivermectin....As a hardcore herper, who frequently ends up drinking very questionable water in the desert, you won't find a bigger cheerleader for Ivermectin than me, but holy hell, why in the world does anyone still think it helps with Covid?

I'm really hoping to see something like Mark "gravy" Roberts used to do to the 9/11 truthers about this dumbass congressional report
 
I saw somewhere that the Democrats in the committee issued a minority report, but I haven't seen it anywhere.
Do any of you know more about this?
 
I can't believe the weirdos are still trying to push ivermectin....As a hardcore herper, who frequently ends up drinking very questionable water in the desert, you won't find a bigger cheerleader for Ivermectin than me, but holy hell, why in the world does anyone still think it helps with Covid?

I'm really hoping to see something like Mark "gravy" Roberts used to do to the 9/11 truthers about this dumbass congressional report
Well, I wish I had the time. But I think the closest we have to a Mark Gravy Roberts is not on this forum but is Peter Miller…

 
In my opinion, this committee has no evidence to support most of its claims, and that it is basically a partisan hack job.
Quelle surprise.
There is no evidence of a precursor virus in the Wuhan lab, still less for Fauci having funded the creation of SARS-CoV2.

The complaints about the FDA discouraging people from turning to ivermectin is a stupid sideline. Apparently some idiots are upset because the FDA effectively mocked people who claimed that ivermectin was a cure or a prophylactic for Covid.


When it comes to masks, there is something infuriating about this. In Japan, people universally masked up, and I am pretty sure that that, plus a kind of soft lockdown slowed the spread of the virus.
This isn't about facts or evidence. That's all just BS the liberal elites use to control us. The only thing that's actually real and matters is our freedoms, and how the government - by merely existing - abrogates them. The FDA discouraging people from turning to ivermectin is not a stupid sideline, it's right at the heart of the matter. How dare they attempt to infringe on our fundamental right to take whatever we please?

You have to understand why this medicine is so important to us. You see, Covid doesn't exist, because if did then enforced quarantines would be reasonable. So we won't abide by them, which means we could get Covid - and then we will need a powerful drug to diispatch it before it kills us.

In case you still don't get it, let me spell it out for you - my freedoms matter, yours don't. It's all about me being able to do whatever I want - however 'stupid' it may be. If you tell me something's stupid then I will do it just to prove that you can't intimidate me. I had to obey your rules when I was a kid because you were bigger than me, but I'm an adult now so I don't have to do what you tell me anymore!

I would also suggest that the fact that flu almost completely dropped off during the Covid years indicates masking and social distancing must have done something.
Yes, and it was devastating - for the 'health' industry.
 
True! SARS-CoV-2 was a leaked bioweapon made by Fauci in a Chinese lab. Also, it doesn't exist, which is why the vaccines are just a form of control, through chips - just ask RFK Jr. He knows that the Wi-Fi is giving us all brain cancer. Also, they stopped us taking ivermectin which is the real cure for the bioweapon that doesn't exist.
 
Idiocy and severe cope with the facts that are so evident now are still strong in this forum thread.
.
Politics has no place in scientific reality but many of you delusional leftists just keep pretending it matters. Lalalalalala. "Not from the lab"... lalalalala. CRAZY conspiracy!
Right wing conspiracy because it is the obvious source... lalalalalalalal.... nothing to see here......

The spillover scam doled out to us within days of the virus spreading is discredited 1000x over. Just deal with it.
 
Idiocy and severe cope with the facts that are so evident now are still strong in this forum thread.
.
Politics has no place in scientific reality but many of you delusional leftists just keep pretending it matters. Lalalalalala. "Not from the lab"... lalalalala. CRAZY conspiracy!
Right wing conspiracy because it is the obvious source... lalalalalalalal.... nothing to see here......

The spillover scam doled out to us within days of the virus spreading is discredited 1000x over. Just deal with it.
Lots of rhetoric there, sherkeu, about the "spillover scam". Who was "doling out the spillover scam"?
 
Back
Top Bottom