Lawyers Rogert & Ulbricht--of 'Dieselgate' fame--claim that VAIDS is 'not a condition but a description of the state-of-affairs' following mRNA injection; note that this was reported by legacy media
Even in Italy something is moving, had a call few hours ago with the regional secretary of a health personnel union that we'll be in touch for news... of course after Political Elections... as in Italy is, sigh!
Hmmm, that would dovetail neatly with what I'm hearing from Austria: lots of behind-the-scene manouvering: I'd suspect a lot of energy being devoted to ass-covering everywhere, so, it's quite something.
People were told that they were ‘safe and effective’. They are neither and I understand - maybe incorrectly - that if fraud can be proven then BigPharma’s indemnity clause is worthless. Surely it is ‘fraud’ to misled millions of people especially when coercion is used - but then I’m no lawyer.
Any action which brings this all to the light of more people is worthwhile if only to convince them not to have any more of these despicable injections!
"Safe and effective" is relative. Nothing's 100% safe or 100% effective. However, if they can dig up monkey business from the trials (and there seems to have been plenty of that; Maddie de Garay, anyone?), watch out.
Precisely. Which is why "you said it was safe and effective, and it was neither" is unlikely to fly in court. You'd need to show they messed with their data or something like that.
Yep, so, my gut feeling is that NOW that the lawyers state such things as 'VAIDS is real' in public (i.e., outside the courtroom), I think they are quite confident that the data bears this out.
And again it is proven that secrecy only benefits corruption and criminals. No option for settlement out of court means businesses will have to shape up or risk multiple claimaints using prejudice to base their suits on.
Or, by way of analogy from mortgage lenders over here in Norway: the central bank's interest rate is 2.75% (iirc, it was >1 a year ago), and there's an expectation that it will be 3+ % later this year. Business media reports that banks (lenders) expect an interest rate of 4+ % next spring, which means that customers are to expect 5% or more next spring.
The cost of doing business (with a profit) is already 'factored in', thus I'd suspect that these costs are already considered (for quite some time). If, say, Pfizer, Moderna et al. had 'only' their contracts in hand, well, given the Western track record of reneging on treaties, I'd go for: credulity and feelings of superiority, but nothing that will stand the test of time, public pressure, and governmental scrutiny (if only because the gov't will need to be seen 'doing something' to avoid the public getting too mad at them).
I, for one, could very well imagine that Big Pharma thinks they are getting away with anything (worked so far), but given all the stuff that's going on with Covid-19, I think they are mistaken.
Sweden is in second place after Denmark when it comes to average household debt. Latest hard data is from 2019 when the average debt per household was some 40 000 Euro. Being average, it is of course skewed but gives a good general view of how dire straits many are in without realising it.
For nigh on twenty years with dropping interest rates, no requirement for actually mortgaging your loan (just paying the monthly fee to the bank), and politician and bankers and housing/building sector all making like 0% interest is the natural state (about 4%-6% per annum is, historically) - the "average" household is "pantad, kalkad & såld"*.
Most people have their car(s) either due to taking out a loan to buy one, or buying it in instalments meaning of course you don't actually own the car until the last payment is done. The same goes for "vitvaror" (meaning washing machines and other household equipment), entertainment machines and electronics and even furniture.
Everything bought againts credit. Nothing owned until last payment is done. Up until recently most people didn't pay off the credit and loans, as I mentioned they just paid the monthly fee instead. Meaning that they may well have paid 50 Euros a month for a 70" screen home entertainment center for years without really paying it off. "A fool and his money..."
We may very well be headed for a crash the likes we haven't seen this side of the year 1900. Most households, especially the under-fifty year olds, doesn't save money or invest. Instead, the consume and borrow and lease and wind up using the last pay-check to keep their credit good, meaning that they in reality are constantly in debt. And they don't really realise what it means if the swedish state's bank (Reichsbank/Riksbanken) raises their interest to 5% - that means their interest to their private bank jumps to at least 7% or more, for every loan and lease. Since the biggest loan generally is the house loan, we may see a total collpase of that entire sector, leading to real depression.
*"Pantad, kalkad & såld" refers to the old practice of pawn-shops to use blackboards and chalk to write the price for wares pawned and put up for sale; pantad is pawned, kalkad refers to the chalk, and sold means you have no chance of getting your stuff back even if you raise money. Game over, so to speak. Totally done for.
Surely if they settled they admit liability and that would open the gates for many more claims? Gambling on it being thrown out of court is really their only chance at avoiding utter ruin.
Hmm... I thought Pfizer et al. had bulletproof liability protection. So, this probably won't go anywhere, right? It might become very embarrassing for the government, though.
I thought so, too, which makes this all the more…'curious'. Perhaps Pfizer has, and maybe BioNTech hasn't? Maybe this has to do with the P.O. boxes and other shenanigans to avoid losses?
I'd also add that I'm a bit more taken by surprise by the fact that they didn't settle out of court (incl. non-disclosure agreements), but it might very well be that, due to their peculiar arrangements with Pfizer, that BioNTech cannot legally do so (the use of the Pfizer form would suggest so).
I don't think neither the EU as whole not individual member states have the kind of liability protection the US has? On the other hand, we also lack the americans' ability to sue over virtually anything.
Nice! great! Let's see! Let's hope!
Even in Italy something is moving, had a call few hours ago with the regional secretary of a health personnel union that we'll be in touch for news... of course after Political Elections... as in Italy is, sigh!
Just published your article translated in italian
https://propagator.substack.com/p/prima-causa-collettiva-tedesca-di
Thanks and take care!
Hmmm, that would dovetail neatly with what I'm hearing from Austria: lots of behind-the-scene manouvering: I'd suspect a lot of energy being devoted to ass-covering everywhere, so, it's quite something.
People were told that they were ‘safe and effective’. They are neither and I understand - maybe incorrectly - that if fraud can be proven then BigPharma’s indemnity clause is worthless. Surely it is ‘fraud’ to misled millions of people especially when coercion is used - but then I’m no lawyer.
Any action which brings this all to the light of more people is worthwhile if only to convince them not to have any more of these despicable injections!
"Safe and effective" is relative. Nothing's 100% safe or 100% effective. However, if they can dig up monkey business from the trials (and there seems to have been plenty of that; Maddie de Garay, anyone?), watch out.
Did you know that 'birth' has a 100% fatality rate? Eventually, everyone dies…
Precisely. Which is why "you said it was safe and effective, and it was neither" is unlikely to fly in court. You'd need to show they messed with their data or something like that.
Yep, so, my gut feeling is that NOW that the lawyers state such things as 'VAIDS is real' in public (i.e., outside the courtroom), I think they are quite confident that the data bears this out.
This is something to keep an eye on, for sure.
And again it is proven that secrecy only benefits corruption and criminals. No option for settlement out of court means businesses will have to shape up or risk multiple claimaints using prejudice to base their suits on.
Or, by way of analogy from mortgage lenders over here in Norway: the central bank's interest rate is 2.75% (iirc, it was >1 a year ago), and there's an expectation that it will be 3+ % later this year. Business media reports that banks (lenders) expect an interest rate of 4+ % next spring, which means that customers are to expect 5% or more next spring.
The cost of doing business (with a profit) is already 'factored in', thus I'd suspect that these costs are already considered (for quite some time). If, say, Pfizer, Moderna et al. had 'only' their contracts in hand, well, given the Western track record of reneging on treaties, I'd go for: credulity and feelings of superiority, but nothing that will stand the test of time, public pressure, and governmental scrutiny (if only because the gov't will need to be seen 'doing something' to avoid the public getting too mad at them).
I, for one, could very well imagine that Big Pharma thinks they are getting away with anything (worked so far), but given all the stuff that's going on with Covid-19, I think they are mistaken.
Sweden is in second place after Denmark when it comes to average household debt. Latest hard data is from 2019 when the average debt per household was some 40 000 Euro. Being average, it is of course skewed but gives a good general view of how dire straits many are in without realising it.
For nigh on twenty years with dropping interest rates, no requirement for actually mortgaging your loan (just paying the monthly fee to the bank), and politician and bankers and housing/building sector all making like 0% interest is the natural state (about 4%-6% per annum is, historically) - the "average" household is "pantad, kalkad & såld"*.
Most people have their car(s) either due to taking out a loan to buy one, or buying it in instalments meaning of course you don't actually own the car until the last payment is done. The same goes for "vitvaror" (meaning washing machines and other household equipment), entertainment machines and electronics and even furniture.
Everything bought againts credit. Nothing owned until last payment is done. Up until recently most people didn't pay off the credit and loans, as I mentioned they just paid the monthly fee instead. Meaning that they may well have paid 50 Euros a month for a 70" screen home entertainment center for years without really paying it off. "A fool and his money..."
We may very well be headed for a crash the likes we haven't seen this side of the year 1900. Most households, especially the under-fifty year olds, doesn't save money or invest. Instead, the consume and borrow and lease and wind up using the last pay-check to keep their credit good, meaning that they in reality are constantly in debt. And they don't really realise what it means if the swedish state's bank (Reichsbank/Riksbanken) raises their interest to 5% - that means their interest to their private bank jumps to at least 7% or more, for every loan and lease. Since the biggest loan generally is the house loan, we may see a total collpase of that entire sector, leading to real depression.
*"Pantad, kalkad & såld" refers to the old practice of pawn-shops to use blackboards and chalk to write the price for wares pawned and put up for sale; pantad is pawned, kalkad refers to the chalk, and sold means you have no chance of getting your stuff back even if you raise money. Game over, so to speak. Totally done for.
Surely if they settled they admit liability and that would open the gates for many more claims? Gambling on it being thrown out of court is really their only chance at avoiding utter ruin.
Hmm... I thought Pfizer et al. had bulletproof liability protection. So, this probably won't go anywhere, right? It might become very embarrassing for the government, though.
I thought so, too, which makes this all the more…'curious'. Perhaps Pfizer has, and maybe BioNTech hasn't? Maybe this has to do with the P.O. boxes and other shenanigans to avoid losses?
I'd also add that I'm a bit more taken by surprise by the fact that they didn't settle out of court (incl. non-disclosure agreements), but it might very well be that, due to their peculiar arrangements with Pfizer, that BioNTech cannot legally do so (the use of the Pfizer form would suggest so).
I don't think neither the EU as whole not individual member states have the kind of liability protection the US has? On the other hand, we also lack the americans' ability to sue over virtually anything.