Business Corruption and Malfeasance

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
💉 I’m not referring to UnitedHealthcare’s controversial “vaccinate or terminate” mandate, which was one of the earliest, requiring employees to be “fully vaccinated” no later than November 30th, 2021. I’m not talking about United’s horrible policy of denying religious exemptions and firing religious employees whose consciences stopped them getting the shots:

image 3.png

I’m not talking about allegations of how United helped the CDC disguise the vaccine injury data or routinely mislabel vaccinated folks as unvaccinated whenever they died post-jab. Nor even United’s grotesque cooperation with the federal government to help push vaccine mandates down the chain, or its offering incentives for jab-pushing doctors to coerce patients into take unsafe and ineffective shots.

(Side note: Playing Devil’s Advocate, as the largest Medicare provider in America, United never had a chance to resist federal mandate pressure. Most of its profits depend on the day-to-day whims of the federal government and its permanent bureaucrats, so the feds hold the insurance giant by the delicate parts. United must do whatever it is told without asking questions. And that is a big part of our problem. The government is too powerful; it should never be allowed to influence health policy through insurance programs, even a little. Never ever.)

So 
 if I’m not talking about United’s deplorable participation in mandates and jab incentives and cooking the covid books, to what part of the pandemic am I connecting Bill Thompson’s assassination?

Masks.


 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Jeff Bezos BEGS Trump To Forgive The Liberal Media As The Washington Post STRUGGLES!​


 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Major airline announces policy to charge customers who bring carry-on bags onto planes, sparking outrage: ‘Not acceptable’


These airline fees are soaring.

Another major air carrier will be implementing an extra charge for carry-on bags, as the cost of checked baggage climbs.

Beginning in January, Air Canada will be charging basic-economy travelers an extra fee for bringing aboard carry-on luggage larger than a handbag or small backpack.

The fee will pertain to flights within the Americas, according to the Miami Herald.

Travelers who choose the budget-friendly fare option will be charged $25 for their first piece of carry-on luggage — which includes both roller bags and oversized rucksacks — and an additional $36 for a second.

If flyers fail to pay when booking their tickets or checking in for their flight, they will face a surcharge at the airport of $46.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
đŸ”„đŸ”„đŸ”„

The Dallas Morning News ran a story yesterday headlined, “Texas lawsuit accuses 3M, DuPont of concealing harm from ‘forever chemicals.’” It almost took forever to get someone in government, somewhere, to do something.

image 4.png


Doing the job the federal health agencies used to do, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton yesterday sued DuPont, 3M, and other manufacturers of so-called PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances), often called “forever chemicals” since they never degrade or break down. The chemicals are commonly used in waterproofing and non-stick coatings, such as on cookware or in protective sprays, and in thousands of other consumer products from carpets to pesticides.

But “these companies knew for decades that PFAS chemicals could cause serious harm to human health, yet continued to advertise them as safe for household use around families and children,” Paxton said in a statement.

The lawsuit (linked here) alleged that exposure to PFAS is connected to high cholesterol, increased risk of childhood infections, harmful reproductive and developmental effects, pregnancy-induced hypertension, decreased birthweight, testicular and kidney cancers, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, and memory loss related to personal item placement. Well, it didn’t actually say the memory loss part, but you never know. It would explain a lot, especially to my wife, who has to help me find everything.

image 3.png

Anyway, Texas became the third state to sue the PFAS manufacturers this year, joining Connecticut and Minnesota. The CDC’s web page on PFAS admits that “many PFAS are found in the blood of people and animals all over the world and are present at low levels in a variety of food products and in the environment,” and clinically notes “exposure to some PFAS in the environment may be linked to harmful health effects in humans and animals.”

So that’s not too good.

The lawsuit’s allegations, if true, are damning. The lawsuit alleges that DuPont knew PFAS were toxic as early as the 1960’s, because exposed workers were getting sick. In 1981, DuPont did an internal blood sampling study of pregnant or recently pregnant employees. Of the eight women in the study who worked with Teflon, two (25%!) bore children with birth defects in their eyes or face, and at least one more had detectable levels of PFAS in their umbilical cord.

Paxton’s lawsuit alleges that DuPont lied and told its employees in writing the pregnancy study showed the chemicals were safe. It then slowly and quietly reassigned pregnant workers to other divisions.

The government has known about the problems with PFAS for decades. One EPA enforcement action was issued in 2004. But our fabulously funded government agencies have not even managed to get a warning label on products containing PFAS. The CDC’s PFAS webpage links to hundreds of other government websites about the chemicals. Nearly every major government agency is involved in PFAS research, including the obvious ones like EPA, FDA, and NIH, as well as more surprising ones like the DOD, the Navy, and the Air Force.


You know, between all the forever PFAS in our bloodstreams and fat tissues, the mRNA spikes in our cells (injected or shedded), and the microplastics building up in our brains, it’s getting pretty crowded in here.

Either way thanks, Texas! Thank you for at least doing something.

Finally, if you have time and interest, read the well-written and informative lawsuit. You can start at paragraph 20 (“Factual Allegations”) to skip the legalese.



 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Google Goes Fully Woke in New Christmas Ad, Sparking Calls for Boycott




Maybe the executives at Google should have done a search on “Bud Light” before introducing its new Christmas advertisement.

Alas, marketing executives in Big Tech are still as dense as Alyssa “Fratty” Heinerscheid, the genius behind the Dylan Mulvaney marketing campaign that managed to shed massive amounts of market share the same way that you’ll probably want to be shedding those post-holiday pounds come Jan. 1. The difference is, she was actually successful, so much so that she was out of a job and Mulvaney has become more of a punchline than a transgender TikTok “influencer.”

Just like Bud Light, Google is basically the biggest name in several of the fields it seeks to dominate — most notably, search engine and online ad provider. Apparently, they thought that they were too big to fail — bigger than some piddling beer brand. So, they hired Cyrus Veyssi — a nonbinary-identifying TikTok star, according to the New York Post — for a Christmas campaign advertising their Google Shopping service.

In the ad, Veyssi, dressed in women’s clothing and in full makeup, complains about how the weather this time of year just doesn’t agree with his complexion.

“This winter dryness is not it. Especially when I have so many holiday looks to pull off,” he says in the ad.

“Thankfully, I know just the thing,” he adds — Google Shopping, which has all manner of hydrating products!

“Hydrated skin is a gift to everyone. No wrapping needed. Happy holidays to me.”

Veyssi shared the ad on his Instagram account earlier this week, along with the caption: “The winter uglies are officially canceled. Thanks to Google’s Nearby filter, I’m ready to pull off all my holiday looks.”




1734267776525.png
 

Clem72

Well-Known Member

Google Goes Fully Woke in New Christmas Ad, Sparking Calls for Boycott




Maybe the executives at Google should have done a search on “Bud Light” before introducing its new Christmas advertisement.

Alas, marketing executives in Big Tech are still as dense as Alyssa “Fratty” Heinerscheid, the genius behind the Dylan Mulvaney marketing campaign that managed to shed massive amounts of market share the same way that you’ll probably want to be shedding those post-holiday pounds come Jan. 1. The difference is, she was actually successful, so much so that she was out of a job and Mulvaney has become more of a punchline than a transgender TikTok “influencer.”

Just like Bud Light, Google is basically the biggest name in several of the fields it seeks to dominate — most notably, search engine and online ad provider. Apparently, they thought that they were too big to fail — bigger than some piddling beer brand. So, they hired Cyrus Veyssi — a nonbinary-identifying TikTok star, according to the New York Post — for a Christmas campaign advertising their Google Shopping service.

In the ad, Veyssi, dressed in women’s clothing and in full makeup, complains about how the weather this time of year just doesn’t agree with his complexion.

“This winter dryness is not it. Especially when I have so many holiday looks to pull off,” he says in the ad.

“Thankfully, I know just the thing,” he adds — Google Shopping, which has all manner of hydrating products!

“Hydrated skin is a gift to everyone. No wrapping needed. Happy holidays to me.”

Veyssi shared the ad on his Instagram account earlier this week, along with the caption: “The winter uglies are officially canceled. Thanks to Google’s Nearby filter, I’m ready to pull off all my holiday looks.”




View attachment 181993

You literally cannot effectively boycott google unless you abstain from all online services. Google gets the bulk of their money from two sources, compute/backend for large companies and ad-sense for peoples eyeballs. And Google ad-sense is EVERYWHERE (including these forums).

Sure, you can boycott googletv (which according to Google does not generate a profit!), or Google One, their cloud storage, which turned a profit for the first time last year of a little over $100M bucks, or less than 1% of google's profit. But I bet you don't use Google One, and if you quit googletv you might save them money,
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Trying to get rid of some crap google puts in your computer or cell phone takes mor IT knowledge than I have.
Microsoft is just as bad or maybe worse.
 

PrchJrkr

Long Haired Country Boy
Ad Free Experience
Patron
Trying to get rid of some crap google puts in your computer or cell phone takes mor IT knowledge than I have.
Microsoft is just as bad or maybe worse.
My fiancé's phone is infected with Samsung internet services. She mistakenly clicked on Samsung browser one damned time and she's been fighting pop-up ads ever since. She's even gone to the Verizon store and they couldn't clear it. After the holidays, we're switching carriers and getting away from Samsung. Eff them!
 
Top