This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program originally aired on May 20. To listen to the program, please click HERE.
Sam Rohrer: Hello, and welcome to this Wednesday edition of Stand In The Gap Today. I’m Sam Rohrer and I’m going to be joined by the full team, Gary Dull and Dave Kistler. And this is our monthly health freedom update. Our guest is Twila Brase, she’s the president and co-founder of Citizens’ Council For Health Freedom, which you can find at cchfreedom.org. I encourage you to do that and go there. A lot of great information and the best when it comes to this area, health, health freedom, privacy rights, that kind of thing and we’re going to be in that space here today.
When it comes to attacks against good health care or patient privacy, or doctor, patient relationships, all which are so important for the kind of healthcare we’ve come to enjoy in this country, the current COVID-19 federal and state policies are, I’m going to say literally destroying what was left of quality healthcare in America. Hospitals are shutting. People are not coming in. Patients are afraid to go to their doctors. Generally treatable conditions are being postponed or not dealt with, and people are dying and ultimately the cost of their care is being increased because they’re not getting the care, all of this, that’s a result of where we are, but today I’m not going to go there as much as we want to focus on the specific points of COVID-19 policies that are being promoted, being encouraged, in some cases forced by law and then funded at enormous amounts through our increasing national debt and these billions of dollars that are being created out of thin air.
Our theme today is COVID-19 testing, tracking vaccinations and false promises. So here’s a question for you as you’re listening today to me, should you be concerned about the big push led even by our president for universal testing, tracking and a promise just made for a hundred million vaccinations by school time, this fall, and 300 million by the end of the year. Well, is that realistic or is that a false hope? Is it good for health freedom or are these things a threat? We’re going to discuss these and more today right here on Stand In The Gap Today and I’m going to welcome in right now to the program Twila Brase. Thank you for being with us Twila.
Twila Brase: It’s great to be here, Sam, thank you.
Sam Rohrer: 10 days ago or so White House Economic Advisor, Kevin Hassett, Twila, made the case for surveillance, testing and aggressive contact tracing as it’s referred to when he appeared with CNN State Of The Union program. And in part the economic advisor, Kevin Hassett said this quote, “There is no downside,” end quote to the question which was then to implement a nationwide aggressive testing and contact tracing system to stop the spread of the coronavirus. He said now to do that, there’s no downside. I have a question for you because it caught my attention whenever I hear no, or all, or everything, or all the time type of promises from anybody in government, I was there long enough to know that there’s something up, but that being the case, does government testing, tracking and surveillance only have an upside with no downside as was said and do either one of them relate to effectiveness or patient health freedom? What do you say?
Twila Brase: Okay, yeah there’s so much that could be said, but let me just say that first of all, people should not forget that we are not trying to stop the spread. The whole thing in the beginning was about slowing the spread, recognizing that there’s really no escape from the virus but the good news is that the majority of people will get COVID-19 and they will never know, they will be asymptomatic, they’ll think it was just a little touch of a cold, it’ll be nothing to them. So this whole idea of stopping this thing, so there’s no stopping it. We hope to get to community immunity, which means that you run out of the susceptible, the virus can’t get anywhere. They can’t jump anywhere because there’s nowhere else to go or there’s not enough and so it dies. The whole idea about testing, tracking and surveillance is all with this idea of stopping and I’m just reiterating there’s no stopping. So testing, good to remember about testing, is that it’s not necessarily reliable, of course tracking can be against our constitutional rights as well as surveillance.
Dave Kistler: Twila, let me ask you a question. I was in England, when all of this got started here in the United States and France and so on. We were actually in a portion of France that later became … right after we left the country and flew home, became one of the hotspots. I was talking to a young lady over there who attended our conference, who is a virologist and she’s 24 years of age, she has no underlying health issues. Her statement to me was this Mr. Kistler, if I knew someone that had this virus, I would go get around them right now so that I could get it, my body will build an immunity up to it and she was basically stating the same thing you’ve said, there’s no way to stop it.
So by trying to do what we’re doing, have we basically in essence ensured that there could be an outbreak of it again in the fall because we’ve not allowed it to work its way through the culture, but we’ve just tried to slow it and we slowed it so significantly that we can almost another outbreak?
Twila Brase: There is definitely disagreement about that, whether that will happen. I have heard an epidemiologist say there’s 10% to 20% likelihood that there will not be a second wave and then others are of course threatening this whole idea of a second wave. But again, the majority of people who get sick won’t even know and there have been some studies out of California that show that somewhere between 20 and 80 times the number of people that are confirmed are actually infected. So there’s more people infected, lots and lots and lots and lots more people infected, than there are confirmed cases. So just because you haven’t been tested, or I haven’t been tested, or whoever hasn’t been tested doesn’t mean that we don’t have, or haven’t already had, COVID-19. So those studies show there’s 20 to 85 times more people infected than confirmed cases, so a lot of people already have it and they just don’t know.
Sam Rohrer: And with that ladies and gentlemen that goes to the heart of it, testing, tracking, vaccinations, false promises. What are we doing since, what Twila was saying, testing is not reliable and tracking is not constitutional, is a real problem with that and the goal was never to stop it, this virus spread, it was to slow it. What are we doing?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Welcome back to Stand In The Gap Today. I’m Sam Rohrer accompanied by Gary Dull and Dave Kistler and our special guest today, Twila Brase, president and co-founder of Citizens Council For Health Freedom, their website cchfreedom.org, that’s where you go, cchfreedom.org. Our theme today, as this is our health freedom update, we do this once a month, sometimes more than that if there happened to be real emergency type things that come up, but we’re talking about COVID-19 testing, tracking, vaccinations and false promises.
Well, you know the COVID-19 virus, we all know, has been the cause of perhaps some of the most worldwide government policies ever witnessed really across the world. All at the same time, it’s an incredible thing. And we’ve discussed that as something unto itself, and we’ve all heard this, there are two things that are absolutely certain. One is death and one is taxes, we’ve all heard that. Well, I’ll tell you one thing that is not certain, and that is freedom. In the end, health freedom, economic freedom, political freedom, civic, and religious freedom. I believe that they have become perhaps the greatest victim in this whole COVID-19 issue.
The purported remedies for this virus, while offering no guarantee of effectiveness, do though hold within them a great deal of further threat to our freedom. So in this segment, we’re going to try and get real about the promises of testing, antibodies, immunity certificates. So Twila, we just discussed briefly in the last segment, the fallacy, and you just referred to it briefly of universal testing. You said it’s not reliable, probably could say more about it, but in reality, even if testing could be reliable at the point that it would be, and it could physically be conducted on every person in America every day, which seems to be what is being talked about the whole point there again, is it accurate?
If testing indicates that someone is positive, then it seems that therefore, what have to be traced as they call it, or tracked and that means a whole lot more, like databases and government bureaucrats being involved and so forth. In Washington State as an example last week, Twila, I saw a state government advertisement looking for, I think it was about 3,000 or so social workers who would go door to door to test people and what I read gave indication that they would have the power to possibly even remove children, like child welfare, because that’s really where they’d be coming from, remove them from the home if a positive case was found. Now, in an article I’m looking at here, the state is saying, “No, that’s not true, they don’t have the ability to remove them,” but I know, like you do, that whenever you open the door with your children to a social worker, you are opening the door to a whole lot more than what you ever thought about.
So I was disturbed by that, but here’s the point in the question. What is the truth about testing and tracking? You’ve already said some, lay it out again in simple terms so our listeners can understand this.
Twila Brase: So several things about testing. So there have been people in the hospital who are clearly experiencing COVID-19, they’ve got a low oxygen saturation level, but they’re sitting there merrily, texting away with their oxygen on, it’s very odd, very, very odd. Doctors haven’t ever seen this kind of thing before and yet they test negative, negative. It takes them maybe days or a week before they test positive. I just heard a doctor talking about how they have done autopsies of COVID-19 patients who have COVID-19, the virus, in their lungs, but they don’t have it in their throat. So where that testing is taking place is in their throat, so you can’t say that this is reliable, because it all depends on where you test and then the antibody test also has some problems with reliability. Some people say you have to be tested three times to really be sure whether it’s true or not.
Then even if you have antibodies, they may not be the neutralizing kind, and then even if you have antibodies, no matter what kind they are, according to the World Health Organization, which is not my favorite organization, but nevertheless, according to the World Health Organization, they say, there’s no evidence that you can’t be reinfected. So, what is all of this testing about? I really think that the only time testing really needs to happen is when you’re sick. If you’re sick, get tested and you might have to be tested several times to actually figure out that you have a COVID-19, or it might always end up to be negative, but I don’t see any other value in it because the second they test you is the only time they’re testing you, so you could meet with somebody who has COVID-19 two hours later, and you could spend a lot of time with them and get infected. By the time your test comes back saying that you don’t have COVID-19, you actually have COVID-19. So to me, it’s just a whole bunch of talk about something that in the end seems quite meaningless.
Gary Dull: Which leads me to this particular question that I have for you Twila and that is that if the testing doesn’t seem to be altogether valid or reliable, and even if the truth about the antibody tests, aren’t accurate as well, what’s the sense of doing any testing at all?
Twila Brase: Right. I agree. Unless you think you’ve actually got it or unless you’re really sick, that’s when you want to know, because as I said before, the majority of people will have COVID-19 and they will never know, but this is an important thing when we’re talking about contact tracing, which is really a very hot issue today, and there are expected to be 100,000 to some say 180,000 contact tracers, roving around the country, talking to anybody who’s been diagnosed with COVID-19 about everybody that they’ve been in contact with. So if you’re never tested, you will never be diagnosed positive, which will take you out of that net, except if somebody else is tested and they list you. Then if they list you, then you’re going to have a knock at the door or a call on the phone, or maybe a visit in the hospital by one of these contact tracers, which are really government reporters, they’re government investigators, government reporters, whatever else their real job is, when they become a contact tracer that’s what they are.
You don’t have to answer any questions, you don’t have to give those names. You have to remember that if you give names, you have no control what then happens to those people whose names you have given. That could include them coming to the house and telling those people that even though there’s maybe only a probability that you’re sick, or there’s only a possibility that they got infected, that these people would have to quarantine themselves for 14 days, depriving them of work or whatever, until they prove at 14 days later that they don’t, or aren’t sick. The contact tracing instructions that I’ve seen is that the contact tracer has to check in every day and make sure you’ve taken your temperature, the temperature thing … So, first of all, that’s an everyday check by a government employed person, a government reporter who can then, if they don’t think that you’re doing what they think you should be doing, can then call somebody higher up from the local health department or the state health department, to bring the law to bear upon you.
But also that whole thing about taking the temperature. There’s all these businesses now that want to take your temperature because that’s what the state’s telling them to do but again, the majority of people who get COVID-19 will be asymptomatic, which means they’ll never have a fever. So then you take somebody’s temperature, they may actually have COVID-19, they don’t have a fever until you let them in and you think you’re all fine and dandy healthy. So again, it’s just something that is being mandated that doesn’t necessarily end up being very useful or meaningful at all, because it’ll lead people to false assurances, when indeed the person that they’re interacting with that doesn’t have a fever may have COVID-19 and may be spreading it around. But as one of you said, some virologists and epidemiologists would love to get close to that person so they’d finally get the illness and they never have to worry about it.
Dave Kistler: Twila, let me ask you this in the minute and a half or so we have left. Let’s talk about immunity certificates. With all of the uncertainty you’re talking about, a test only being as good as the day you’re tested, you have to be tested again because you could come in contact with someone that has it, so that test that you took yesterday is not good for today. With all of this uncertainty that we’re talking about, the antibody uncertainty and all of this, what’s the significance of an immunity certificate? I mean, what do they really mean and how could this in a dramatic way potentially impact a person’s health freedom?
Twila Brase: Yes. So an immunity certificate, the whole idea there is that you have been declared immune and now you can work, live, play, walk freely. However, again, it’s meaningless. The fact that you might have antibodies doesn’t mean you won’t be reinfected. The fact that you test negative doesn’t mean that you won’t test positive the very next day if you were tested the next day, which you wouldn’t be. All of that is meaningless, but it will definitely restrict your freedom because as you can see from even the snitch lines that have started up around country and the police officers coming in and arresting people who are all by themselves, there is this drive to take away people’s freedom if they don’t comply, if they don’t have the proper certificate, or they aren’t doing the proper thing. So it’s a really bad idea to move to immunity certificates. One, they don’t mean anything, but two, they will lead to a loss of freedom.
Sam Rohrer: And ladies and gentlemen, that’s the point. That’s why we’re talking here today on our health freedom update, is that this COVID-19 policies as we’re laying out are built on premises, we’ve talked about that are not reliable, not predictable and even in the case of a certificate, immune certificate, don’t mean anything when you have it. But what did I hear Twila saying as you’ve been listening? More workers, more people on the ground, more government, that’s the impact on the freedom we’re talking about and that is a big concern.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
We’re now at our midpoint in the program and I want to go to Twila right now, before we get into what the president is calling Warp Speed initiative and that is an expedited vaccines development, and we do want to talk about that. You have written a book, Twila, that just got some fairly significant acclaim. Take just a minute and talk to us about it.
Twila Brase: Oh, thanks so much. Yes, Big Brother In The Exam Room: The Dangerous Truth About Electronic Health Records just got several awards at the Eric Hoffer Book Award, which was just announced on Monday and so I got an award for a first time author, another award for a thought-provoking book, and then got winner in the health category. So I’m really thrilled about that. Anybody who wants to get a copy of the book can find it anywhere where books are sold, Amazon, et cetera, but you can also go to bigbrotherintheexamroom.com, bigbrotherintheexamroom.com. I put on our Facebook page the judge’s review and the judge’s review is very fun because it’s very clear that she had no idea or he, or whoever it is, had no idea how the electronic records were being used, or the fact that HIPAA doesn’t protect anybody’s privacy and so it was great to get that review.
Sam Rohrer: Congratulations on that and just wanted to share that with our listeners today, to know that when you are on, you have done a significant amount of work and you are a credible in a space that’s very important to us. Okay, let’s go back to the Warp Speeder. A few weeks ago Twila, President Trump announced a new major initiative, he dubbed it Warp Speed. It was basically, or is, a goal to expedite and in conjunction with the federal government and big pharma to develop at faster speeds than ever before, a vaccine for COVID-19 virus. He recently announced that great progress has been made and he promised at that time to have a hundred million vaccines ready for this fall’s school year and 300 million by the end of the year. I say this, all of this, despite a long list of reasons, why always before anyways, we’ve been told it can’t be done.
So here we go. I want to ask you right now, Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, on our program last week said that it was clinically impossible to have a vaccination in place on this level because there has not yet been a successful vaccination against any virus. Secondly, the necessary clinical trials require a couple of years, not a couple of months and if those who are listening to the program today, that one minute spot that you produce, you were just talking about that aspect, so it’s good timing. So what are we witnessing here, Twila, in this whole effort to warp speed develop vaccines? Is a vaccine, from your perspective, even possible? And this question, is one even desirable?
Twila Brase: I think there’s perhaps several things at play here. One is the entire PR war, the war between the major media who wants to do everything possible to make sure that President Trump is not reelected and to put a stain everywhere that they can on his presidency. And then the White House’s opposing force, which is to do everything possible to show the American people that the president is in charge and doing good things in hopes of actually being reelected. So I think that’s one of the really big things that’s happening here.
Another thing is that President Trump has managed to accomplish all sorts of things that people did not think that he could accomplish but in this case, I think that Dr. Orient is correct and lots of epidemiologists and others, say that it would be at least 12 to 24 months before any kind of vaccine would be available.
But then I’ll add to that is, we don’t have a vaccine for HIV, which is a human … What is it? human immunodeficiency virus, that’s a virus and we’ve had it for a long time and there’s never been a vaccine for it. So I don’t know that we’ll get it and then I don’t even know if it’ll be reliable. So, we need look no further than seasonal flu vaccine. So in 2014, I think it was in that vaccine, or that flu season it had 19% accuracy. I think last year it was like 28% accuracy and yet the flu, in I think it was 2017, 2018, that flu season, it killed 61,000 people and was 38% valid at that time.
So I think there’s a lot of promises being made here, maybe for political and PR purposes, more than anything. My guess is that president Trump actually knows that it’s unlikely, but I don’t have any idea. He might just be making the promises to calm the public, that’s another possibility.
Gary Dull: Well, the president did say Twila, that if the vaccine was developed, that he might even call up the military to distribute and dispense these vaccines. My question is why would he do that? And if he did that, wouldn’t that bypass the family physician? So I’m not sure that I understand the process or the reasoning behind that.
Twila Brase: Well, the pharmacy industry, the pharmaceutical industry are trying to bypass the family physicians and just let you go to the pharmacy and get your vaccines. So that’s a general driving force here, particularly those who are getting money to give vaccines and government funding to give vaccines.
So that continues on, and maybe he’s hearing that from some of the people that he talks with, but one thing that I would say about vaccinations, which is what I said in the minute, it’s kind of fun to hear my minute while I was waiting here, but it should be underscored. It should be underscored that there is no guarantee, but also this thing about the vaccine backfiring. By backfiring, that means that when a person gets the vaccine and then they later get the virus, the vaccine has actually caused the virus to be more virulent within the person who’s vaccinated, making it much more difficult for them to fight it off and making the virus more deadly for them, that this kind of backfiring does indeed happen. So, you won’t know and so the idea even of forcing vaccinations, which is what they’re talking about now, it’s not even taking this into play, this whole idea that it could make you worse off rather than better off.
Dave Kistler: Twila, let me ask you this. With respect to this public private partnership that the president has talked about a lot, trying to expedite the process of both research and then the production of a vaccine. How does that factor into the citizenry of the United States and our health freedom? Do you see some concerns there?
Twila Brase: I think there’s always some trouble with these developments of public private partnerships. So the private part of it, which is the corporations, are always looking for the easiest way to grab everybody’s money, which is to get the government, to give it to you, to take it from the people and give it to you to do whatever you say you’re going to do, or promise to do, or hope to have happen, or all of that sort of thing. So this becomes a very, what would be a good word? Kind of like a parasitic relationship or symbiotic relationship where the government gets to say they’re going to make all these things happen through private industry, but the private industry is using it as an opportunity to gain the hardworking dollars of taxpayers.
So I always get a little bit leery of these kinds of arrangements, because lots of times over the history of them, there have been many, many, many promises made and many billions of dollars transferred out of taxpayers’ pockets that then lead to nothing, or very little of something. Maybe if it was private industry working with private industry’s own dollars, they would be more careful and they wouldn’t go after things because it would lose money and they don’t want to lose their own money. So I guess that’s my response.
Sam Rohrer: I want to follow up on that and say that when I was in the Pennsylvania house, I adamantly opposed the public private partnerships, and Bill Clinton really pushed it hard. George W. Bush really pushed it hard, but they were always loaded with that same kind of incestuous relationship that you talk about right there and I won’t go into further detail. Let me go back to here on the vaccination part of it. It seems that in the narrative that we’re hearing and that’s being put forth, is as if a vaccination becomes the gateway back to real life, that it is the solution to all of our troubles, but that’s what Bill Gates has been pushing for. That’s what the globalists are pushing for, vaccines that everybody’s going to have to take, but yet you made it very clear, they are loaded with potential problems and they don’t even always help, in some cases they’re worse, but is there any alternative? In other words, this narrative is the only hope that’s put out there. How do you respond to that?
Twila Brase: Well, the real hope lies in the fact that the majority of people don’t have any ramifications of the illness at all, at all. So, they don’t even know they’re sick, that’s the real hope. What really has to happen is what is happening, and that is that the doctors are figuring out the best way to deal with COVID-19. They’re figuring out what this very unusual pathophysiology is and they are learning how to treat it successfully, doing things that they have never done before, treating people ways they have never treated them before, turning down the ventilators in ways they’ve never done, keeping people off in ways they’ve never done, using medications in ways they’ve never done.
The pathophysiology, just letting the doctors figure it out is the very best thing, realizing that most people will never end up in that situation and then going to the medications that work early, like hydroxychloroquine. Why on earth is government saying that we shouldn’t be able to use something …..
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Sam Rohrer: In our final segment, we’re going to look at something really haven’t talked too much about on this program but I think all of us who are listening would probably know someone, family member or others, that would be in a nursing home. One of the consequences of the ongoing COVID-19 policies are the limitations as we know on nursing, home visits and so forth, where our parents and grandparents might be living, or other family members. The preventing of family members from visiting has on one hand, some substantive reasons when it comes to the spread of the virus. But on the other hand, unique to probably any other time in history, this separating of loved ones, loved ones from the elderly who are at a time in their life where they’re, well, pretty much alone anyway. In fact, it may just be producing a scenario that in some degrees is more harmful than helpful.
I just looked at an article out of the United Kingdom from this very thing, talking about how lonely life has become for those in nursing homes, some not having any real physical contact with anybody for days on end. It was an amazing thing. So it’s an issue that has gotten some other attention and Twila, I want to talk to you about that because it’s a health freedom issue in a way, but you have a concern and you mentioned that to me, when we have a duty biblically to honor our parents, to care for them when they are in need and at that time of their life they are, and we are thankful for really good nursing homes. There are many, there are some that are not, and that’s why there are policies that govern them on state level, but many are very, very good. Yet, you’ve identified a very practical and policy concern from a patient health freedom perspective that I don’t think we want to miss. Tell us about your concern, would you?
Twila Brase: I’ve just generally been concerned about the fact that these folks, our seniors, are in these facilities. The facilities’ doors have been locked. The seniors are the most vulnerable group to this condition, they know it, they’re watching the news like the rest of us. They have no family that’s allowed to be in there to come to visit them. They’re probably worried that they’re going to die alone without their family. That even if they get it, yep they could go to the hospital, and they could be put on a vent, but at no time would they be able to see their family members. I think this is just tragic.
I think that, the one thing about freedom and in a free country, is the ability to take risks and to take risks wisely. When we think about protecting ourselves or protecting others and all these people walking around with masks and gloves and stuff, and just look at yourself when you’re walking around with your mask and your gloves and figure out every place that your hands have gone. Unless you have washed your hands every time, every time that they touch something, you are likely doing cross contamination. So even if you’ve got a clean cart, the very second that you pick up a grocery item and you put it in your cart, who touched that grocery item before you? Did you wash your hands then before you touched your cart handle? No.
So, this is impossible to really protect yourself against. Even isolation units in hospitals have a hard time making sure that the bug that’s inside the room, or the bugs that are outside the room don’t get one way or the other. So very, very difficult and yet these people are being stranded, left alone. Many of them to die alone without their families. In Minnesota, we have a law that says that you can go into a quarantine area, but you might not be able to come out. Okay, fine. Take all your groceries with you and go stay with your loved ones, that’s one way of doing it. But the other is just to recognize that it’s impossible to control this illness, it just really is. You can go in with all your stuff and see your family. I think it’s just such a dishonorable thing and it’s such a … Well, it’s just not compassionate, it’s not caring, it’s not looking at the most important thing, which is the relationship.
Sam Rohrer: So Twila, are you suggesting that those kinds of protective non visit policies have just been over done, are not necessary at all? Or what are you saying, just so our listeners are clear?
Twila Brase: No, I think that you should do everything possible to have clean hands and you can choose not to get close to one another, but to actually go in to the room and spend some time talking, if you want to be six feet away, fine. But just to allow that to happen, because a lot of the seniors are probably dying of a lonely heart. They’re not even allowed to congregate together for meals, so they’re there alone in the last days of their life. If a family member wants to go in and see them, fine. Let there be a washing station, let whatever happens there, if you want gloves, gloves, but it’s really about protecting you more than anyone else, with the gloves, so I’d rethink that.
Sam Rohrer: Okay. Gary I want to go to you. We only have just a couple minutes left, just give a minute comment. Early on in this process, I know you, as a pastor, were prohibited from going and visiting people who were sick and were dying, and that grieved your heart as a pastor. That gets into the same space that Twila’s talking to us about.
Gary Dull: I still am. I can’t get into the local nursing homes or the local hospitals. I’ve had a few people in over these past weeks and months and just have to sit by and watch. Even some of the family members can’t get in. In fact, in our local hospital here, in Altoon Pennsylvania, they just opened it up the other day to the point that one support person can go in and visit a patient that’s in there. There’s just something, and I know we don’t have time to delve into it, but there’s just something going through my mind, Twila. Quickly, yes or no. God has created this body to have a certain amount of natural immunization built within it, don’t you think we just ought to let the body do what the body’s designed to do under God’s creation?
Twila Brase: Right, there is some immunity that we are already given, all sorts of things like our skin and cilia and all sorts of things in our nose and some people are going to die because they’re susceptible, or it’s their time, or whatever. Well, God, determines what time is. So no matter what, it’s their time, right? Yeah, that’s true.
Gary Dull: Because yeah, we’re talking about these people in these homes and they’re dying alone and they know it. They really do know it. From a pastoral perspective who works with people on a consistent basis, this is of great concern.
Sam Rohrer: Thank you, Gary and thank you Twila for being with us. Again, ladies and gentlemen, you can go to her website, cchfreedom.com and go to our website. Pick up this program, send it along to a friend at standinthegapradio.com. That’s where to go. Until tomorrow, stand in the gap for truth where you are, and we’ll see you back right here, 23 hours from now.
Recent Comments