Vaxxed
23 May, 2023
It is possible to legislate coherently on Artificial Intelligence?
10 July, 2023
30 June, 2023
Navigating the aftermath of COVID-19 has posed significant challenges in recent years, with an excess of restrictions and mandates enforced in the name of public health. Organizations like SaaStr continue to implement guidelines that some consider invasive and a direct attack on their human rights. It would be better to rename it Di-SaaStr.
A year ago we talked about SaaStr and the event they organized in Barcelona, unfortunately we are back to discuss it again for similar reasons.
I attended the event they organized in London on June 6th and 7th. Although there were no control measures during registration related to COVID-19, such as presenting vaccination certificates or PCR tests, as they had indicated when tickets were purchased, attendees were subjected to temperature checks. This remnant of the protocols that have been enforced upon us for 3 years remains a coercive norm, keeping the masses subdued under the threat of expulsion.
The fact that this occurs in London is particularly noteworthy. The British population has shown a steadfast defense of individual liberties since the beginning of the "plandemic," opposing mandates they perceive as violations of their rights. As movement restrictions are being relaxed worldwide, the policies of Di-SaaStr are becoming increasingly perplexing.
Based on the principles of the Nuremberg Code, which emphasize the voluntary consent of any human being to undergo medical experimentation, we must assert that the imposition of verifying our body temperature violates our rights. The cornerstone of human rights and the Nuremberg Code is the ability to make autonomous decisions regarding our bodies and our health. Demanding tests of our physical or sanitary conditions as a condition to participate in an event is a violation of this fundamental principle. It is unethical and a complete overreach of an organization's authority.
In a time when the public faith in government strategies is wavering, organizations must carefully consider their positions. The need for safety and health is undeniable, but equally important is the need for individual autonomy and respect for our rights.
Let us advocate for events and communities that promote inclusion, respect, and diversity of thought, but not in a propagandistic manner, rather genuinely. We must uphold the principles of the Nuremberg Code and defend the human right to make informed decisions about personal health and bodily autonomy.
For starters, I will not be returning to Di-SaaStr.
