Tag: corpocracy

Mailvox: Blue Cross Doubles Down

The SJWs at Blue Cross Blue Shield are still attempting to coerce their employees into submitting to the vaccine regime despite every legal ruling going against the vaccine mandates to date:

I’ve attached an internal email I received from the president/CEO of Blue Cross, stating they are still requiring employees to get the clot shot regardless of the mandate being halted. He states in the last paragraph the vaccines are “safe, effective, and FDA-approved.” I don’t know if this deceit is from sheer ignorance or pure malevolence. In the end, it doesn’t matter, the threat is still the same. To tell people the shots are FDA approved, knowing full well they are not, and to threaten them over it, has me enraged.

They denied a religious exemption. When I inquired about it, I received a form letter saying I didn’t match their criteria and there are no appeals. They ignored follow-up emails. I tried filing a complaint with EEOC, but they need an inquiry review first, and the earliest date was in Feb., a month after the termination date. I’ve tried filling an inquiry with the California chapter of Children’s Health Defense and have gotten no response.

The only thing I can think to do is attempt to shine a light on this evil. Maybe it can inspire others to stand up, and push back, file civil lawsuits against the man since he’s the one responsible for violating federal law.

—

From the desk of President and CEO Daniel J. Loepp

BCBSM will move ahead with our vaccination requirements

As you may have read in the news, a Federal District Court judge in Georgia has issued a nationwide injunction requiring the federal government to stop all actions to enforce the federal contractor vaccine mandate. This ruling is a step in a legal process that undoubtedly will continue to play out in the federal courts over coming weeks and months.

The ruling, regardless of its effect on federal enforcement efforts, will not affect BCBSM and our subsidiaries from moving forward to implement our previously announced policy requiring employees to be fully vaccinated by Jan. 4.

BCBSM has a legal right, as an employer, to issue policies protecting the health and safety of our workforce, including requiring employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. As such, we are within our legal authority to continue with enforcement of our policy over the coming weeks.

As our Chief Medical Officer, Dr. James Grant, and I have stated many times before, the safe, effective, and FDA-approved vaccines available to us now are the single best way for us, our colleagues, families, and communities to defeat COVID-19 and return BCBSM and our enterprise companies to a normal state of business operations. As a health care organization – committed to enriching, extending, and saving lives – we believe promoting vaccinations that have proven to save lives is the right course to take.

Daniel J. Loepp

President and CEO

This information is for internal use only, as it can contain proprietary or confidential information. It is not to be shared outside the company.

Given that it’s California, it’s going to be very, very difficult to do anything preemptively. Fortunately, the courts in California tend to be strongly anti-corporate. The best strategy at this point is to simply wait to get fired, and then seek recourse. Never forget that the enemy always gets a vote and that trying to prevent a wrongful action can be more difficult than exacting legal retribution for one.

Note that California-based Google is also firing all of its unvaccinated employees.

But remember, it’s very hard to get a court or a legal authority or even a policeman to address a situation before it actually happens. Yes, the perpetrators-to-be may have SAID they’re going to do something, but they haven’t actually done it yet. So there isn’t any serious justification for any legal action yet, because sparing people the emotional and psychological strain of experiencing the wrongful action is just not a concern to anyone on either side of the legal process.

DISCUSS ON SG

$40 Million to Kill Ivermectin

That’s how much the Gates Foundation was willing to pay for ONE SINGLE STUDY that falsely badmouthed the successful early treatment of Covid-19 with Ivermectin:

Andrew Hill, PhD, is a senior visiting Research Fellow in Pharmacology at Liverpool University. He is also an advisor for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation. As a researcher for the WHO evaluating ivermectin, Hill wielded enormous influence over international guidance for the drug’s use.

Hill had previously authored a analysis of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 that found the drug overwhelmingly effective.

On Jan. 6 of 2021, Hill testified enthusiastically before the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidlelines Panel in support of ivermectin’s use. Within a month, however, Hill found himself in what he describes as a “tricky situation.” Under pressure from his funding sponsors, Hill then published an unfavorable study. Ironically, he used the same sources as in the original study. Only the conclusions had changed.

Shortly before he published, Dr. Tess Lawrie, Director of the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy in Bath, England, and one of the world’s leading medical research analysts, contacted Hill via Zoom and recorded the call (transcript below). Lawrie had learned of his new position and reached out to try to rectify the situation.

In a remarkable exchange, a transcript of which appears on pages 137 – 143 in Kennedy’s book, Hill admitted his manipulated study would likely delay the uptake of ivermectin in the UK and United States, but said he hoped his doing so would only set the lifesaving drug’s acceptance back by about “six weeks,” after which he was willing to give his support for its use.

Hill affirmed that the rate of death at that time was 15,000 people per day. At the 80 percent recovery rate using the drug, which Hill and Lawrie discussed earlier in the call, the number of preventable deaths incurred by such a delay would be staggering — as many as 504,000.

Lawrie was unable to persuade Hill, who instead of joining her team as lead author, went ahead and published his manipulated findings.

Four days before publication, Hill’s sponsor Unitaid gave the University of Liverpool, Hill’s employer $40 million.

The Gates Foundation is the primary private sponsor of Unitaid.

Unitaid warmly welcomes the extension of a long-term partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with a new commitment of US$ 50 million, bringing the foundation’s total contribution to Unitaid to US$ 150 million since 2006.

Now, imagine how much more the Gates Foundation has paid for all the other anti-ivermectin propaganda in order to a) sell more vaccines and b) depopulate the planet. This is why you should NEVER trust the Fake Science, which is most corporate- and foundation-funded scientistry these days.

DISCUSS ON SG

Boosters are Forever

Once you get on the vaccine rollercoaster, they’re not going to let you off easily:

Vaccines Minister Maggie Throup has told Brits they ‘probably will’ have to get a coronavirus booster jab every year.

Ms Throup pointed to the Government’s latest vaccine purchase of 114million new doses which are due to be delivered in 2022 and 2023 as she said ‘it would be wrong of us not to be prepared’.

The comments on the BBC’s Question Time programme came after the boss of Pfizer, Dr Albert Bourla, said annual vaccinations ‘are likely to be needed’.

Congratulations, you failed the stupid test. Did you really believe it was ever about your health rather than the financial health of the pharmaceutical companies and their puppet scientists?

DISCUSS ON SG

Hiding the Science

How can anyone “trust the science” when the actual scientody is being hidden by scientistry because it violates The Narrative?

The study concludes that the mRNA vaccines “dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle,” which researchers say is likely to account for the increased number of adverse cardiac or vascular events and side effects such as thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and others in patients post-vaccination.

From the study:

“These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS (acute coronary syndrome) risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”

This is not the only study to have found this result, but it is the only one to have been released.

Esteemed British cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra went on GB News to blow the whistle about how he had been contacted by another researcher from a prestigious British Institution who told him that research done by his department has found similar results, saying they too had found a link between the inflammation of coronary arteries and the experimental mRNA vaccines during their own imaging studies.

Unbelievably, the whistleblower says the institution has decided not to publish the findings, opting instead to hide the results over fears that the institution would lose its research funding.

Malhotra explained that the whistleblower – who is remaining anonymous for his safety – was furious about the decision to bury the findings, especially considering the fact that the latest health data from the UK shows there has been a substantial increase in the number of cardiology-related deaths in the country since the time the experimental vaccine was made available.

“In good science, we never rely on one study. We need to replicate these findings.

A few days ago after this was published, somebody from a very prestigious British institution – a cardiology department researcher [and] a whistleblower – contacted me to say that researchers in [his] department had found something similar within the coronary arteries linked to the vaccine.

They had a meeting and these researchers at the moment have decided they’re not going to publish their findings because they are concerned about losing research money from the drug industry.

Knowing this information, which is very concerning, [in addition to] Steven Gundry’s paper, and also anecdotal evidence…being told by colleagues that younger and younger people coming in with heart attacks.

So what does this mean in terms of the data? We know since July there’s been almost 10,000 excess non-Covid deaths and most of those, or a significant portion of those have been driven by circulatury disease – or in other words heart attack and stroke.”

And how can anyone trust the scientistry when scientists are observably more interested in money than they are in the actual results they discover through their research?

DISCUSS ON SG

Keeping Big Tech in Line

Not the United States, unfortunately. But China continues to crack down on the corporate elite and their rapacious financial parasitism:

China’s state market regulator said it was fining e-commerce giant Alibaba, along with other Big Tech majors including Baidu and JD.com, over violations of the country’s anti-monopoly legislation. The State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) slapped fines of $78,300 on each corporation, saying they failed to declare 43 deals, dating back to 2012, to the proper authorities.

The list of antitrust violation cases that have been brought to light include Beijing Baidu Wangxun Technology and Nanjing Wangdian Technology’s joint purchase of Nanjing Xinfeng Network Technology, Alibaba’s acquisition of the equity of AutoNavi Software Holdings, and Tencent’s acquisition of equity in China Medical Online.

All the cases announced represent transactions that should have been declared but weren’t. SAMR noted that the list includes a raft of firms and a long transaction time span.

“With the in-depth advancement of anti-monopoly law enforcement, the awareness of corporate operators’ concentration declarations has continued to increase, proactively sorting out and reporting the concentration of operators that have not previously been declared illegally … and actively cooperating with investigations,” the watchdog said on Saturday on its official WeChat account.

The penalties are the latest development in Beijing’s major clampdown on technology-focused businesses, amid a nationwide move towards increasing national security. The country’s tech giants, particularly the ones operating in the financial sector, have been under close scrutiny from state authorities due to their increasing power.

In October, the SAMR imposed a fine of $533.5 million on food delivery platform Meituan. The penalty over monopolistic practices was the second-biggest fine on the Chinese platform economy since Alibaba was slapped a record $2.8 billion antitrust fine in April, for exclusionary practices.

The corporations, both Chinese and US-based, should have seen this coming. There can be no question that Xi is genuinely committed to fighting all forms of corruption; an intelligence report on him written before he came to power even highlighted the expectation that he would “aggressively attempt to address these evils”.

Xi knows how very corrupt China is and is repulsed by the all-encompassing commercialization of Chinese society,
with its attendant nouveau riche, official corruption, loss of values, dignity, and self-respect, and such “moral evils”
as drugs and prostitution, the professor stated. The professor speculated that if Xi were to become the Party General Secretary, he would likely aggressively attempt to address these evils, perhaps at the expense of the new moneyed class.

DISCUSS ON SG

23 and Me Sells Your DNA Data

This is the exact opposite of “surprising”:

Cynics will say that nothing says “trusted neighborhood doctor” quite like a company that is a cross between Big Pharma and Big Tech – but apparently Anne Wojcicki’s 23andMe wants to be perceived as having the characteristics of all three.

The company, best known for harvesting genetic data from millions of Americans via spit tests that produced questionably useful information to the customers, recently went public, and now the serious side of its business is emerging – using all that data to develop new drugs and usher in the era of a new kind of Big Pharma that relies on Big Tech strategies of collecting data and monetizing it.

It would have been difficult not to see this one coming. I’m just a little surprised they didn’t do it sooner.

DISCUSS ON SG

Evading the Obvious

It’s always amusing to see how SJWs set their projects up for failure, then do their best to hide the obvious reason for the failure from everyone. This year’s Strictly Come Dancing premier, which is one of the most popular British television events, mysteriously lost 16 percent of its ratings from last year’s premier, and is down nearly one-quarter from its 2016 peak viewership. A plethora of reasons for this decline have been suggested.

Strictly’s launch night scored its lowest ever viewing figures on Saturday – with the low numbers said to be down to good weather, line-up and anti-vaxx controversy.

The BBC show attracted an audience of 7.2 million viewers for the inaugural show over the weekend, and while those numbers remain broadly impressive, they still represent a significant drop from last year’s 8.6 million.

While insiders remain positive over a rise when live shows return, prior to the launch airing fans insisted they were less than impressed with the line-up and Covid claims surrounding the show, while sources said the good weather was to blame.

Other users grumbled over the absence of Janette Manrara and insisted the show peaked with last year’s winner Bill Bailey. The Twitter users in question penned: ‘Why is janette not dancing this year? I love watching her. It’s not the same on ITT… I’m not even watching it this year, Bill was peak Strictly for me, cannot be beaten’.

Another claim was that the weather was a key factor in explaining the figures.

The TV source told the Sunday Mirror newspaper: ‘Lots of people had been out and about enjoying the early autumn sunshine and will probably watch on catch-up today.’

Other concerns surround the news of a ‘no jab, no jive’ row, over the refusal of two of its dancers to be vaccinated.

Of course, while the real reason is mentioned, it is not mentioned in the context of being responsible for the near-textbook ratings loss, which I would anticipate will end up being around the usual 20 percent first-year convergence-related decline described in Corporate Cancer.

Craig Revel Horwood has tipped John Waite and Johannes Radebe to win this year’s ‘Strictly’. The duo have formed the first ever all-male pairing on the show, and Craig views them as the frontrunners in this year’s competition.

Yeah, it’s probably the weather. Right. The reality is that the better the offensive all-male pairing does on the show, the more the ratings will decline. It doesn’t matter whether the subject is sports, video games, or female-focused television, convergence always kills. And those pushing and/or defending the convergence never, ever learn from all of the previously documented examples of the phenomenon.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Broken Window School of Medicine

Pfizer is going to offer booster subscribers a twice-daily pill to keep them from dying of adverse reactions and mutant ADE infections breaking through the boosters:

Pharmaceutical megacorporation pfizer is now developing a COVID pill that is meant to be taken alongside the COVID vaccines that have already made the company a staggering amount of money. The new pill is expected to be released by the end of the year and will be required to be taken twice per day.

“Success against #COVID19 will likely require both vaccines & treatments,” Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said on Wednesday. “We’re pleased to share we’ve started a Phase 2/3 study of our oral antiviral candidate-specifically designed to combat SARS-CoV-2-in non-hospitalized, low-risk adults.”

Seriously, who keeps falling for this nonsense? Precisely how brain-dead must you be to keep buying what they’re selling?

DISCUSS ON SG

Not All Employers are Idiots

Even some hospitals are beginning to recognize that not requiring the vaxx – which as soon as October will require THREE shots in the USA to maintain “fully vaccinated” status -will give them a competitive advantage in acquiring and retaining employees in a difficult labor environment:

I was visiting with a couple board members of local hospitals recently. One asked the other if they were going to require their employees to get vaccinated. The hospital is ~70% vaccinated, and the board member said they discussed it but decided at this time, they would not because 1) they were worried about losing even a small portion of the remaining 30% and creating issues with hospital staffing, and 2) as most hospitals around us are requiring it, they felt they may have a hiring advantage if they are in the minority of hospitals that do not require employees to be vaccinated.

So don’t be afraid to tell your employer that a) you are willing to get fired over any requirement to inject foreign substances into your body and b) that if employees with less than three shots are not also fired before the end of the year, you will sue them for discrimination.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Game of Corporate Chicken

An executive at a Fortune 500 confirms that the corporations are bluffing with regards to their vaccination policies:

I’m in a senior position at a Fortune 500 company, and I can tell you that leadership is highly, highly stressed about the number of people refusing mandatory vaccinations. They are currently betting that employees will blink before management, but if the unvaccinated employees stand firm in their convictions, this company will be fucked. If the company follows through on its threats and fires all the unvaccinated employees, the company will be decimated and will not be able to function.

Don’t give up. Don’t give in. There are more of us than there are of them.

He’s right. Stand strong, stand firm, and keep your genes clean. And did you catch what this stress on the part of vaccine-refusers implies? The reported percentage of people who have already been vaccinated is almost certainly exaggerated.

Discuss on SG.