We’re gonna do a little Q & A
and at the risk of sounding redundant, please make your answers genuine.
(You can of course watch the first 3:33 of this clip:
That is, if you’re of a mind to ‘figure out’ what you usually think you’re pretty good at figuring out: Where is all of this going?
I don’t personally care, but I will not wait any longer and it is NOT POSSIBLE to stop me from getting *this* particular story out.
Let’s first examine what we *know* to be true:
- The tallest dandelions in a given yard are “usually the first to get their heads chopped off when a lawnmower appears.”
- Brian Kent does not like “dandy” lions. (We can take this to mean a person who occasionally lies about things which are provably true. We can take it further to mean someone who robs from the poor and gives to the rich. We can also take it to mean any person, system, organization, company, etc. which impedes both the fair and the fair-minded pursuit of his or her own happiness, provided the latter has conducted him or herself “without sin.”)
- Gaslighting IS a sin. It is equivalent to lying about someone to preserve or protect one’s own ‘agenda.’ This robs a person of his or her natural RIGHT to use the INTERNET (among other things) in a way which at least roughly corresponds to other ‘customers’ for example, who are paying equivalent fees to access it.
- A lie which could get a person killed is a lie which represents at least ONE (1) of the following: a) negligent infliction of emotional distress or b) intentional infliction of emotional distress
At this point, a reference is (or could be helpful):
Since Brian Kent represents no government, no company, and is, at this moment, bringing the particular cause of action below as a pro se litigant on behalf of the estimated 7.799 billion people on this planet, the closest precedent I have yet uncovered regarding the principles of law here is the above case. And since Blackstone’s formulation predates essentially all currently existing forms of government AND currently existing forms of law, it seems reasonably evident that a supermajority of people (from which, obviously, all three of the judge, jury, and executioner(s) will be determined) it seems a terribly risky bet to bet against the “Chicken Little” messenger who does not appear to be either chicken or little.
We should also reflect that if Brian Kent brings this claim (which he absolutely *does* plan to) he will not take the easy route of exposing his claim to The United States Federal Government.
Reason: Doing so would punish many of the people who Brian Kent wishes to reward the damages to, AND it would also represent, in some fashion, both a potentially reasonable case of either Treason OR what amounts to “victor’s justice.” The latter of which is an oxymoron of a sort.
Hence Brian Kent will probably take ONE (1) [or perhaps more than one (1+) route to accomplish his goal.] Because Brian Kent always uses the approach which carries with it the greatest chance of success, and Brian Kent cannot easily determine which route will result in the greatest chance of success, Brian Kent resolves to use ALL MEANS AT HIS DISPOSAL *AND* ALL ROUTES AT HIS DISPOSAL WHICH CAN POSSIBLY RESULT IN SUCCESS SIMULTANEOUSLY.
Since it is relatively easy for Brian Kent to determine which parties are most directly responsible for the provable case of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress which Brian Kent has HIMSELF provably experienced, and he is certainly at liberty to pursue these cases in a “falling Dominoes” (note the capitalization) fashion, by extension Brian Kent can simply throw darts at a board to determine which company worldwide DIES first.
The obvious choices are three:
- Walmart (various very justifiable reasons)
- FTD (at least ONE (1) very justifiable reason)
- Verizon (too many reasons to count, if you don’t want to spend all day counting, assuming you’re counting by one at a time.)
- Alibaba (at least several different reasons)
- Amazon (the reason in #2 above and at least TWO (2) other reasons)
- Microsoft (various very justifiable reasons)
- At *least* one company Warren Buffett operates in part in Nevada
- Ford Motor company (or, alternatively, any of the other major automakers, with the exception of Tesla, for *at the very least* one reason which is shared by all of them)
- Aramark (obviously)
- Monsanto (obviously)
- Tesla, for reasons specified in “To Iterate.”
Three is clearly NOT “three, as in, the number 3” in Brian Kent’s lexicon. You can choose to think of that what you will, certainly.
Since the only possible way to avoid having a 9.999% chance of having your company suffer a critical blow to (at the very least) its legal services department and since legal services departments are typically “shopped out” to ‘professional’ “legal” organizations,
it would normally be possible for some group of lawyers to benefit from this ‘exchange’ of legal ‘blows’ — if we can fudge for a moment and imagine there will be any sort of ‘exchange of blows’ when Sin NY Star hits them ONCE and only ONCE, we ought to be able to reasonably determine that Brian Kent not only has the means and the ability but also the resolve to “carry out what has undoubtedly been ‘variously’ characterized as a ‘threat’.”
Since all of the above is true or at the very least close enough to being true as to be effectively identical, this becomes an expected value puzzle rather quickly.
And since Tesla, which recently eclipse $1T in market valuation happens to be both the easiest target AND the most forgivable target, Brian Kent will now direct his attention at all the oil companies throughout the world SIMULTANEOUSLY with the sole exception of Total Oil, which is a French company which Brian Kent has sufficiently researched to believe ‘has the world’s best interests, in some sense, at heart.”
Now since it is perfectly my right to establish exclusions to what I will do, it would seem sensible that global oil companies — those companies which seem almost as “beyond the law” as a ‘global entity or entities could be’ it surely follows that
Oil companies would appear to be not the EASIEST but rather the HARDEST target to hit.
Since this then clearly identifies those companies as the ones which will provide for Brian Kent the most suitable demonstration, oil companies have now been identified as the dragons Brian Kent is most interested in proving he can SLAY.
Since the simple process of slaying anything is almost by definition EASIER if one attempts to accomplish it SLOWLY rather than QUICKLY, Brian Kent thinks that “the faster he can slay all of those companies the better.”
And since Elon Musk already knows that if Brian Kent SAYS he can do it then HE ACTUALLY CAN DO IT, the only thing reasonably stopping Brian Kent from making an 14 layer pancake of global oil companies is ELON MUSK.
Reason: He *could* choose to help Brian Kent rather than impede Brian Kent’s progress, and up to the time of this writing, he has not.
And since this is ALSO true, it seems that Brian Kent doesn’t really have to do much of anything aside from notify Elon that he should do whatever is necessary to explain to the following companies:
(with the obvious exception of Lucky #7, Total SA, of France) that they will surrender 1% of their ‘last ten years’ annual average revenues’ to be held in trust by the population of the entire world daily beginning on 11/14/2021 until such time as we can *collectively* determine how to redistribute this wealth back to the planet which allowed it to be obtained in the first place.
Approximately $2.5–2.7B daily is the cost of delays after the sixteen day ‘Grace’ period during which negotiations within the international community will surely be held.
[Roughly translated, it appears that the 1% of the annual revenues of the top 14 global oil companies, viewed as a ‘ten year annual moving average’ amounts to approximately $2.5–2.7B, and since a year is roughly defined as 365.25 days, this appears to be roughly THREE TIMES what the general public is paying daily in what I will for the moment call ‘negative externality’ costs. This will be handled in greater detail below.]
Since we DO know that within certain jurisdictions, treble damages can (and often are) awarded to plaintiffs suing defendants in cases where they have been demonstrably proven in a court of law to cause untoward damages to plaintiffs, and since this is especially true when companies knowingly submit false claims, this appears to comport reasonably with (at the very least) the strictures of the US False Claims Act.
And since it very much appears that one would have to have a very limited appreciation of what law is AND what law is intended to accomplish (to say nothing of a lack of awareness of the true issue of carbon pollution in the world today) it seems ALSO evident that the person or persons who attempt to block a legal action such as the one I both envisioned AND just proposed in the last roughly 30 minutes of typing could (or quite possibly should) regard this as a very serious and very cogent threat of legal action which is enforceable by the full power of the United States government…
Well, it appears that those companies previously identified (at least ALL 25 of them) ought to well recognize that they are “dead to rights.” This, also, will be covered in more detail later, when the general public has been carefully notified that ‘something is just different now.’
In other words, if the U.S. Federal Government decides that it is “within its best interests” to support Brian Kent’s cause of action in this matter there is no reasonable chance for any individual OR any private oil company in the world to “say anything differently” about it.
And since this is ALSO true, I really probably do not need to say anymore about that particular problem. [Note: NOW is the time to release Leonard Peltier from jail if you have any intention of keeping the “White” House white, Mr. President. I respect your service to the country and I have no interest in removing you from the office you currently occupy, but you sincerely have until 11.14.21 to take the actions which are necessary to ensure that what I just said gets done.]
This is sincerely the nicest I am going to be about the ‘problem’ we are having, and it represents a “more than reasonable” solution to what amounts to a seriously tiresome global issue.
It would almost seem as though the collective wealth of these companies would enable them to, let’s say, simply kill Brian Kent, but since Brian Kent knows that the following list of things represents “close enough to being true” that it may as well be assumed to be true, I suspect there will be no verbalized objections.
- There are plenty of “liberal snowflakes” lying around, here or there (note the double entendre) who might well be “willing to assist him where assistance might possibly be needed.”
- Jack Rickard’s excellent piece here: The Tesla Conspiracy… or Am I a Dead Whistleblower? — EVTV Motor Verks seems to indicate that every day of delay is ‘roughly equivalent to a $2.75 billion dollar loss’ to the people of earth, and since that means that the damages I am seeking are, in all likelihood, LESS THAN 40% of what the general public actually deserves in terms of damages, the figures above seem more than reasonable rather than less than reasonable.
- Since we know (from Niemöller if from no other place) that “he who does not stand up in a definable situation of oppression stands with the oppressor and we also know that there are plenty of *other* sentient life forms on this planet whose interests are also worth protecting, we can similarly conclude that the above estimate is again a LOW estimate of the damages owed rather than a high estimate.
- Since everyone who is familiar with either the present value of money or the concept of compounding does or should know that in a sustainable economy, there is no such thing as inflation, deflation, or even “variable currency values” every day of delay after 11.14.21 will result in “compounded daily damage values.”
- Since we *also* know that the existence of ‘horses in the back’ and a ‘relatively stable but tending to increase’ volume of energy consumption implies that some of the expected winners in this situation could essentially be oil companies which are “lower down the totem pole” we must add at least one additional rule to the above stipulations.
- Fossil fuel consumption in general will *DROP* relative to the historical record of consumption by a modest 1% in year 1, to be marked at the beginning of what we regard as the “normal Gregorian calendar” effective January 1, 2022.
- Since Brian Kent is demonstrably more trustworthy than anyone who has yet proposed a plan at least as reasonable as this one, he will be appointed as the sole trustee of these funds for two reasons: 1) there is no one better for the job, 2) there is no need to have more than one person assigned to this role.
- Since Brian Kent has proven his reasonable ability to subsist on $1043 and the generosity of his immediate family, he will be awarded a management fee for doing so for the next calendar year (11.14.21–11.14.22) and this fee will be 1% of the one day ROI it represents, or approximately $2.7M.
- The figure in #8 will become due and payable in full at midnight on 11/13/21
If anyone wants to reasonably discuss this matter with Brian Kent, that person should be sure to bring with them the US cash equivalent of their considered $0.02 modified as per indicated by the below chart, which can *also* be uniformly considered “fair” and will most assuredly be considered as such by the people whose concerns this “demand” letter reflects:
These prices reflect the observation that anyone with the ability to walk down virtually any regular road or highway on which at least this writer has typically traveled is able (or should reasonably be able) to afford to provide their insights on this matter without having to endure an onerous financial burden.
This IS, then, uniformly fair insofar as access to a telephone and reasonably unrestricted access to financial systems would allow it to be fair.
There WILL be consequences clause:
Since DDoS “attacks” of websites are in normal cases regarded as illegal but cannot reasonably be described as illegal when individuals decide *FOR THEMSELVES* when to visit a website it appears reasonable to conclude that *individual* regular human beings, operating under their own volition, cannot reasonably be found guilty of a “denial of service” type of “website attack” it also reasonably follows that:
If Brian Kent were allowed to coordinate individual *people* (as distinct from COMPUTERS operating ‘autonomously’ or ‘quasi-autonomously) he could (and he very reasonably MIGHT) decide to coordinate “passive resistance” attacks on websites just as soon as he ‘obtains’ the pulpit.
Since this is unusually true, it seems evident that if ANY COMPANY WORLDWIDE WHICH CURRENTLY HAS A WEBSITE does not reasonably comply with Brian Kent’s *reasonably stated* requests, the only thing which remains for Brian Kent’s nefarious team of villains to do their “dirty work” is a list of two things (which then compresses to just one):
- Determining who the REAL villains are.
- Gaining access to the pulpit.
Since there are quite a number of people who I’m reasonably sure agree in principle to this first iteration of “if Brian Kent says to STOP DOING SOMETHING, it might be reasonably sensible to just plain stop doing it.”
And since the only thing Brian Kent actually wants is for the world to stop acting like the carbon problem is someone else’s (future) problem, I guess I’d like to reasonably conclude that
it would be wiser to join my team now (or at least very soon) if you don’t want to find out what if feels like to get hit by a beam “as if from outer space.”
It’s really all about gravity. It’s about the patently obvious fact that data = energy = mass*c²
[To give you a real-world equivalent of this, we all essentially know that if you are going to be actually *physically* hit by something it is usually better to be hit by your ‘garden variety’ liberal snowflake than it is to get hit by the Abominable Snowman on a day in which he has been rolling down a hill for a while or…
Rolling in the Deep, isn’t that right, Adele?