Steve Kirsch banned me for suggesting he hire a PI to determine if Dover is dead or alive.
I asked Steve to make a an offer - through her husband -- of One Million Dollars -- for an interview -- after the NBC interview (with a woman who clearly was not Tiffany) ...
Surely if she's alive she'd take the mil considering she already did a freebie.
Steve Kirsch is fake... he is a false actor... and a C789.
Amusingly Steve posted a comment on another SS and I immediately revisited this with a response... he did not respond... and I have never seen him active on any SSs since.
The joining of state and corporate power is the definition of fascism.
Welcome to reality.
Worth noting here that Net Present Value isn’t the motivation here, it’s the way the system is rigged—it works this way because it has been constructed to work this way. Economics without morals and ethics is total bankruptcy.
Indeed. But the only difference between communism and fascism is that the state ownership of corporations is indirect rather than direct, for the most part. Otherwise they are just collectivist philosophies pretending to allow an economy to perpetuate as long as it keeps the people controlled.
Sure, but always sold as socialist utopia. The only non-socialist tyrannical regime was Pinochet's, who came to power on the basis that he would impose democracy by force and then abdicate (which he did)
There are many examples of tyranny in history that are not predicated on socialism. But that is beside the point.
What we are facing at the moment is not solely about economic structural incentives, as suggested by Net Present Value, or socialist ideas. The system has been constructed to perform exactly as it is right now.
There is a pathological will to harm and kill people in large numbers, and it is being implemented through authoritarian tyranny with the military industrial intelligence complex at the wheel. Wallpapering this with preferred labels does nothing to clarify this or change that reality.
I disagree on the intentional harm. You see, they do need the slave class. Without the slave class they cannot exist as elites. In order to create a slave class they need to sell the idea of equity whilst practising something else. Every version of this is socialism, but with different coloured bows. I do understand that is confronting for those who think that socialist ideas are benevolent, but they are not and they never were. There are in history also "benevolent" dictators (Pinochet, Gaddafi) but it's all relative I suppose! To have a system that relies on the benevolence of the leader is always suspect to corruption and the people often don't help being lured with the promise of free stuff. The snake's apple. Is an age old story....
Culling doesn’t mean there will be no slave class, just fewer. There are many slow-cull mechanisms at work in the world. Slow motion by no means disproves intentional harm.
As for the benevolence or systems, I think you may be overly focused on socialism. Any system can be bent toward exploitation and enslavement, no matter the dogma and popular imagination, and socialism is not alone here. There are no systems good in and of themselves—it always comes down to the people, good and bad. And when you refer to Pinochet as a benevolent dictator (even in quotes) you’re standing on quicksand. Authoritarian brutality, even guided by ‘principles’, is still brutality.
The movie "Logan's Run" outlined this idea. Each event is assigned a value. If trying to contain an event exceeds that value it is deemed not worth the effort to pursue. If the profit exceeds paying out for malfeasance it's worthwhile. Human life is naturally less important than profit.
I got a thing about Richard Jordan, the film stuck with me. I think that's how the non psychopathic WEF members square it with themselves. We took our place on the carousel and got the jab. The posh neighbourhoods got saline, New Brunswick CA excess mortality up 70% 2021.
The corporations are not tools of the state, its the other way around. The state, which in Australia IS a corporation itself, is a tool of the ultimate private corporations which shield behind the legal barriers of their controlled and subsidiary corporation pretending to be and acting as the state.
I don't think it's unidirectional. Private corporation is an oxymoron. Either something is owned or i not. If its liability devolves to the state and the state controls the people (rather than the other way round), it's a corporation
Oxymoron point taken. I use private in relation to corporations to make the point that claims that these are State entities is used to imply they belong to the state meaning the people. It is not true and this should be clear as a Corporation is an entity that governs itself in its own interest, or perhaps more correctly, for the interests of those who crested it for their benefit. The only way many supposedly 'state' corporations can belong to the 'State' is if the 'State' itself is a corporation which most are now. And yes, absolutely we are in a condition where the 'State' controls the people in contradiction to the Constitution made by and established for the people. There are so many unelected non-government agencies/authorities and influence bodies of people 'advising' or fulfilling functions that affect the people's lives in important ways they are becoming countless. Many are very shadowy groupings which are near impossible to find Lawful foundations for, for their roles in public activities including even with the supposed government.
Both are true. The state is often a corporation. And in addition the state owns the liabilities of registered corporations. That is, there is no liability devolved to the people running the corporation. If the corporation fails with unpaid liabilities that other corporations cannot absorb (such as a bank) the state will have to bail it out.
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 23, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
I found the link to "The Corporate State" very interesting indeed. Food for thought. However I totally disagree: transnational corporations (and first the finance industry) have taken over the state. Sure there is no longer any real distinction between the two. The state is now middle management inside the corporate global governance. And the policymakers are the central bankers along with the biggest asset management companies. The state is far below in the chain of command.
At least the Australian Government could have stood by YPLL or Years of Potential Life Lost (e.g. death after ~78 years old) in evaluating the different policy options. They knew that pretty much only old people died from CV19 yet younger people are dying from the Vaccine... of course it was always the plan,
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 23, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
This is Sacklers’ story too. McKinsey exists thanks to NPV… by the way, I think in Fight Club, when Ed Norton meets “Tyler” for the first time (or in an overt monologue), he talks about a similar risk/benefit assessment in the car industry (maybe seat belts, or breaks?).
The film's lawyer character claimed to have been involved in the Ford Pinto scandal whereby Ford could have fixed a problem with the gas tank of the Pinto for $11 per car. Instead, they calculated that it would be cheaper for a few people to die and pay them off than recall the whole range.
There are many indications that the case of the "Ford Pinto" was the basis for the script of the 1991 film "Class Action" ("Precedent Case"-the Polish title), with Gene Hackman, who, as a lawyer, takes on the defense of the interests of a man injured in a traffic accident. The lawyer proves that the cause of the tragedy was a design flaw in the car his client was driving.
Edward Norton's Character in Fight Club was a car recall specialist, he explained to Tyler Durden (aka Brad Pitt) the cold economics behind the value of a human life. The vaccine trial was fraudulent, the Nuremberg code is clear on informed consent in medical trials, and each country has legislation on corporate manslaughter. Following the collapse of the Morandi Bridge in Genoa 59 people were indicted for manslaughter. If I were Bourla I'd be worried.
Nightmare real estate development (destruction) that has converted S. California's rolling hills into plastic-box horror also runs on this concept. Rather than paying to do quality construction, they have law firms devoted to processing payoffs. Because why manage natural paradise any other way?
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 25, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
I said I didn't understand the term. Truth is I have known this for many decades. Union Carbide did it in Bopal India. Chevron did it in Columbia. I always understood it as the cost of doing business. That is if doing business is cheaper by paying a fine. Pay the fine and "Keep Going"
Yeah I think we all knew the concept. But the point of this is to bring home that the corporations know the concept and treat it as a mathematical sum. As long is it is >0 they will just keep going. Human life is of no special mathematical value
I do think some can be shamed and if the profit isn't enough can do differently. Sadly, what might have shamed someone in the past may not even warrant a notice, today.
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 26, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
You know what else the taxpayers are paying? 50 million PR propaganda campaign run by the CDC to convince people to get these shots, hiring the same advertising firm that works for Pfiz. and Mod. So we pay the bill to have someone manipulate us into poisoning our genetic heritage and shortening our lifespans. (Letter from Rand Paul about this on a new post by Mathew Aldred: https://mathewaldred.substack.com/p/rand-paul-to-walensky-state-paying)
The taxpayer also pays for the development of the knowledge and technology -- which is then privatized before becoming profitable. Profitable, being at this point that governments pay millions for stockpiling their product and then forcing people to get it. Which is waved through safety checks because these companies donate some of that (taxpayer) money back to the agencies in charge of checking its safety, and the corporations are able to donate more or manipulate more than the citizens themselves -- meaning that the public agencies are not serving the public. (Nice post by A Midwestern Doctor about this recently: https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/who-owns-the-cdc).
Then the taxpayer pays the bill for all of our fellow people whose lives get derailed by the toxic product. And how about the future bills: disability payments, special education tutors, nurses, any other support profession needed to deal with future brain changes (law enforcement?), whether neurodegenerative or questionably yet-unknown neurodevelopmental complications.
Edit: May I suggest, that the taxpayers be so kind as to bail these companies out if they ever have the misfortune of being financially penalized or risking bankruptcy due to mismanagement and greed?
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'll repeat myself: there is no difference between this and what happened in the 70 and 80s with a Big Food transnational corporation whose CEO I happened to personally know really well for family reasons. His company was responsible for 1 MILLION babies' death in the Third World every year according to an USAID whistleblower. I knew the guy well enough to assure you that he wasn't I psychopath. Simply the informations coming from Africa and India just bounced back on his brain. The only thing he could see was the RoI and the company's stock, and --eventually-- the bad PR his company got because of the killings. So he was very much bothered with law firms and communication but didn't care about the kids who were killed or disabled. This is how the corporate world functions, it is that simple…
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 23, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
No need for that it's already there: endocrinien disruptors, carcinogens, etc... and now the jabs. There is a 100% level of heart injuries with triple jabbed people. And just wait for the cancers.
Those compensation schemes are just another con. Their real value lies in using their existence against the "safe" lie. If they are safe, why do we have such schemes? Since don't the makers pay out instead of ourselves? What kind of a compensation is that where our taxes are used to compensate us for being whacked?
One thing is true though: the payouts have been rare, like their lie of "rare" injuries and deaths.
Yellowcake.
Iraq.
Depleted uranium.
Anthrax vaxxxine ptsd.
Libya. Syria. Afghanistan. Russia. Taiwan. nUkraine.
Incubator babies.
Controlled demolition.
Even when they get caught they never get caught
So true.
And sometimes they don't get caught: Morgellons --> labs moved to Wuhan and Ukraine
I wonder how much Tiffany Dover’s payoff factored into Pfizer’s Net Present Value?
A drop in the ocean
Steve Kirsch banned me for suggesting he hire a PI to determine if Dover is dead or alive.
I asked Steve to make a an offer - through her husband -- of One Million Dollars -- for an interview -- after the NBC interview (with a woman who clearly was not Tiffany) ...
Surely if she's alive she'd take the mil considering she already did a freebie.
I even provided details of where the husband works https://conandaily.com/2020/12/19/dustin-dover-biography-13-things-about-higdon-alabama-man/
But nope. Steve instead banned Fast Eddy.
Steve Kirsch is fake... he is a false actor... and a C789.
Amusingly Steve posted a comment on another SS and I immediately revisited this with a response... he did not respond... and I have never seen him active on any SSs since.
Like I said ... he is dumpy bald C789.
The joining of state and corporate power is the definition of fascism.
Welcome to reality.
Worth noting here that Net Present Value isn’t the motivation here, it’s the way the system is rigged—it works this way because it has been constructed to work this way. Economics without morals and ethics is total bankruptcy.
Indeed. But the only difference between communism and fascism is that the state ownership of corporations is indirect rather than direct, for the most part. Otherwise they are just collectivist philosophies pretending to allow an economy to perpetuate as long as it keeps the people controlled.
Authoritarian tyranny is what it is, no matter what label is placed upon it, ne c’est pas?
Sure, but always sold as socialist utopia. The only non-socialist tyrannical regime was Pinochet's, who came to power on the basis that he would impose democracy by force and then abdicate (which he did)
There are many examples of tyranny in history that are not predicated on socialism. But that is beside the point.
What we are facing at the moment is not solely about economic structural incentives, as suggested by Net Present Value, or socialist ideas. The system has been constructed to perform exactly as it is right now.
There is a pathological will to harm and kill people in large numbers, and it is being implemented through authoritarian tyranny with the military industrial intelligence complex at the wheel. Wallpapering this with preferred labels does nothing to clarify this or change that reality.
I disagree on the intentional harm. You see, they do need the slave class. Without the slave class they cannot exist as elites. In order to create a slave class they need to sell the idea of equity whilst practising something else. Every version of this is socialism, but with different coloured bows. I do understand that is confronting for those who think that socialist ideas are benevolent, but they are not and they never were. There are in history also "benevolent" dictators (Pinochet, Gaddafi) but it's all relative I suppose! To have a system that relies on the benevolence of the leader is always suspect to corruption and the people often don't help being lured with the promise of free stuff. The snake's apple. Is an age old story....
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/adam-eve-and-the-serpent_b_3967406
Ah, I see. I think your logic is somewhat flawed.
Culling doesn’t mean there will be no slave class, just fewer. There are many slow-cull mechanisms at work in the world. Slow motion by no means disproves intentional harm.
As for the benevolence or systems, I think you may be overly focused on socialism. Any system can be bent toward exploitation and enslavement, no matter the dogma and popular imagination, and socialism is not alone here. There are no systems good in and of themselves—it always comes down to the people, good and bad. And when you refer to Pinochet as a benevolent dictator (even in quotes) you’re standing on quicksand. Authoritarian brutality, even guided by ‘principles’, is still brutality.
d
What happened to the comment? I was reading a story one minute then it disappeared!
According to which criteria? Where do the batistas, francos, somozas etc. etc. come in?
The movie "Logan's Run" outlined this idea. Each event is assigned a value. If trying to contain an event exceeds that value it is deemed not worth the effort to pursue. If the profit exceeds paying out for malfeasance it's worthwhile. Human life is naturally less important than profit.
The scamdemic viruganda narrative is Logan's run with a needle instead of the carousel.
The movie stuck with me although I couldn't understand as a child seeing it....
They used it as an instruction manual
I got a thing about Richard Jordan, the film stuck with me. I think that's how the non psychopathic WEF members square it with themselves. We took our place on the carousel and got the jab. The posh neighbourhoods got saline, New Brunswick CA excess mortality up 70% 2021.
I suppose the philosophy behind it is a good idea. It can be applied to any scenario. Whether society would approve is another Matter.
Viruganda! 👍👍👍
There is a book. Books are always better - general rule of thumb.
I read the book first. The movie didn't make as much sense as the book.
The corporations are not tools of the state, its the other way around. The state, which in Australia IS a corporation itself, is a tool of the ultimate private corporations which shield behind the legal barriers of their controlled and subsidiary corporation pretending to be and acting as the state.
I don't think it's unidirectional. Private corporation is an oxymoron. Either something is owned or i not. If its liability devolves to the state and the state controls the people (rather than the other way round), it's a corporation
Oxymoron point taken. I use private in relation to corporations to make the point that claims that these are State entities is used to imply they belong to the state meaning the people. It is not true and this should be clear as a Corporation is an entity that governs itself in its own interest, or perhaps more correctly, for the interests of those who crested it for their benefit. The only way many supposedly 'state' corporations can belong to the 'State' is if the 'State' itself is a corporation which most are now. And yes, absolutely we are in a condition where the 'State' controls the people in contradiction to the Constitution made by and established for the people. There are so many unelected non-government agencies/authorities and influence bodies of people 'advising' or fulfilling functions that affect the people's lives in important ways they are becoming countless. Many are very shadowy groupings which are near impossible to find Lawful foundations for, for their roles in public activities including even with the supposed government.
Both are true. The state is often a corporation. And in addition the state owns the liabilities of registered corporations. That is, there is no liability devolved to the people running the corporation. If the corporation fails with unpaid liabilities that other corporations cannot absorb (such as a bank) the state will have to bail it out.
Utilitarianism has turned a bit too ugly to watch...
I found the link to "The Corporate State" very interesting indeed. Food for thought. However I totally disagree: transnational corporations (and first the finance industry) have taken over the state. Sure there is no longer any real distinction between the two. The state is now middle management inside the corporate global governance. And the policymakers are the central bankers along with the biggest asset management companies. The state is far below in the chain of command.
At least the Australian Government could have stood by YPLL or Years of Potential Life Lost (e.g. death after ~78 years old) in evaluating the different policy options. They knew that pretty much only old people died from CV19 yet younger people are dying from the Vaccine... of course it was always the plan,
This is Sacklers’ story too. McKinsey exists thanks to NPV… by the way, I think in Fight Club, when Ed Norton meets “Tyler” for the first time (or in an overt monologue), he talks about a similar risk/benefit assessment in the car industry (maybe seat belts, or breaks?).
I think it was his character's job.
The film's lawyer character claimed to have been involved in the Ford Pinto scandal whereby Ford could have fixed a problem with the gas tank of the Pinto for $11 per car. Instead, they calculated that it would be cheaper for a few people to die and pay them off than recall the whole range.
https://philosophia.uncg.edu/phi361-matteson/module-1-why-does-business-need-ethics/case-the-ford-pinto/
There are many indications that the case of the "Ford Pinto" was the basis for the script of the 1991 film "Class Action" ("Precedent Case"-the Polish title), with Gene Hackman, who, as a lawyer, takes on the defense of the interests of a man injured in a traffic accident. The lawyer proves that the cause of the tragedy was a design flaw in the car his client was driving.
Ooh I'll have to look that one up
Edward Norton's Character in Fight Club was a car recall specialist, he explained to Tyler Durden (aka Brad Pitt) the cold economics behind the value of a human life. The vaccine trial was fraudulent, the Nuremberg code is clear on informed consent in medical trials, and each country has legislation on corporate manslaughter. Following the collapse of the Morandi Bridge in Genoa 59 people were indicted for manslaughter. If I were Bourla I'd be worried.
I figured you’d know the details…
🥳🐭🥳
Nightmare real estate development (destruction) that has converted S. California's rolling hills into plastic-box horror also runs on this concept. Rather than paying to do quality construction, they have law firms devoted to processing payoffs. Because why manage natural paradise any other way?
I said I didn't understand the term. Truth is I have known this for many decades. Union Carbide did it in Bopal India. Chevron did it in Columbia. I always understood it as the cost of doing business. That is if doing business is cheaper by paying a fine. Pay the fine and "Keep Going"
Yeah I think we all knew the concept. But the point of this is to bring home that the corporations know the concept and treat it as a mathematical sum. As long is it is >0 they will just keep going. Human life is of no special mathematical value
I do think some can be shamed and if the profit isn't enough can do differently. Sadly, what might have shamed someone in the past may not even warrant a notice, today.
You know what else the taxpayers are paying? 50 million PR propaganda campaign run by the CDC to convince people to get these shots, hiring the same advertising firm that works for Pfiz. and Mod. So we pay the bill to have someone manipulate us into poisoning our genetic heritage and shortening our lifespans. (Letter from Rand Paul about this on a new post by Mathew Aldred: https://mathewaldred.substack.com/p/rand-paul-to-walensky-state-paying)
The taxpayer also pays for the development of the knowledge and technology -- which is then privatized before becoming profitable. Profitable, being at this point that governments pay millions for stockpiling their product and then forcing people to get it. Which is waved through safety checks because these companies donate some of that (taxpayer) money back to the agencies in charge of checking its safety, and the corporations are able to donate more or manipulate more than the citizens themselves -- meaning that the public agencies are not serving the public. (Nice post by A Midwestern Doctor about this recently: https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/who-owns-the-cdc).
Then the taxpayer pays the bill for all of our fellow people whose lives get derailed by the toxic product. And how about the future bills: disability payments, special education tutors, nurses, any other support profession needed to deal with future brain changes (law enforcement?), whether neurodegenerative or questionably yet-unknown neurodevelopmental complications.
Edit: May I suggest, that the taxpayers be so kind as to bail these companies out if they ever have the misfortune of being financially penalized or risking bankruptcy due to mismanagement and greed?
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'll repeat myself: there is no difference between this and what happened in the 70 and 80s with a Big Food transnational corporation whose CEO I happened to personally know really well for family reasons. His company was responsible for 1 MILLION babies' death in the Third World every year according to an USAID whistleblower. I knew the guy well enough to assure you that he wasn't I psychopath. Simply the informations coming from Africa and India just bounced back on his brain. The only thing he could see was the RoI and the company's stock, and --eventually-- the bad PR his company got because of the killings. So he was very much bothered with law firms and communication but didn't care about the kids who were killed or disabled. This is how the corporate world functions, it is that simple…
Nestle. Satan's favourite corporation
People are bad.
That's why we gotta get rid of them :-D (tongue-in-cheek)
Send the meteor. 💥
No need for that it's already there: endocrinien disruptors, carcinogens, etc... and now the jabs. There is a 100% level of heart injuries with triple jabbed people. And just wait for the cancers.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/new-study-shows-that-pretty-much?
METEOR, SMYTH!
😹
Sage Love your solution!
This is what the public-private partnership - espoused by WEF - looks like.
I cannot imagine any sane society wanting more of this.
The WEF public private partnership is Hitler's socialist model updated to include mobile phones, to keep you happy
Not very happy! 😡
Boeing is experimenting with this concept:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/22/business/boeing-737-max-crime-victims/index.html
https://sagehana.substack.com/p/boeing-24-a-cryptic-short-story
Vaccine safety: Learning from the Boeing 737 MAX disasters
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2648251
I think Boeing lost more than it stands to gain. I think the 737s were grounded for months following the crashes.
I think your right. Just means they got their sums wrong i.e. they underestimated the “cost” side of the equation.
Simple concept. And true.
Those compensation schemes are just another con. Their real value lies in using their existence against the "safe" lie. If they are safe, why do we have such schemes? Since don't the makers pay out instead of ourselves? What kind of a compensation is that where our taxes are used to compensate us for being whacked?
One thing is true though: the payouts have been rare, like their lie of "rare" injuries and deaths.