Sandra Finley

Jan 072022

Those who revealed un-redacted cables have never been prosecuted nor requested to remove them from the internet, writes Dean Yates.

By Dean Yates
in Tasmania, Australia

I wrote a piece for Australian online publisher Crikey just before Julian Assange’s extradition hearings resumed in September 2020 in which I regurgitated a slur that has done enormous harm to his reputation.

Australian journalists should stop using the WikiLeaks treasure trove in their stories if they wouldn’t speak up for Assange, I’d written. Journalists like to think they’d go to jail to protect a source. Well, their source was suffering in London’s high-security Belmarsh prison, I said.

The problem was I also wrote that Assange dumped the Iraq and Afghan war logs on the internet without redacting names. I was wrong and lazy in repeating that slur which appeared whenever you Googled Assange’s name. That must make it true, right? Two of Assange’s well-known Australian supporters tried to correct me. To my shame, I brushed them off.

Their overtures nagging at the back of my mind, I recently did what I should have done at the time: read the submissions Assange’s legal team made at his extradition hearings and transcripts of witness testimony. I soon realized how mistaken I was.

Why should anyone listen to me?

In Baghdad

I was bureau chief for the Reuters news service in Baghdad when an Apache gunship with the call-sign Crazy Horse 1-8 killed 12 people including two of my staff, photographer Namir Noor Eldeen and driver Saeed Chmagh, on July 12, 2007. Namir and Saeed would have been forgotten statistics of that illegal war if not for Assange’s publication of footage he famously called Collateral Murder on April 2010. Thanks to Assange and Chelsea Manning, Namir and Saeed’s names will never be forgotten.

Screenshot from ‘Collateral Murder’ video released by WikiLeaks.

Wikileaks had hundreds of thousands of documents it had gotten from Manning – the war logs and State Department cables — for a considerable period in 2010 and went to “extraordinary lengths to publish them in a responsible and redacted manner,” the submissions to a lower U.K. court said. WikiLeaks held back information while it formed media partnerships with news organizations such as The Guardian, The New York Times and DER SPIEGEL to manage the release of the material. Assange’s legal team cited named witnesses, various journalists who worked with Assange on the process. Those witnesses testified to the rigor of the redaction effort.

The media partners’ work on the Afghan war logs included approaching the White House before releasing them. In July 2010, Wikileaks also entered dialogue with the White House about redacting names. On July 25, 2010, WikiLeaks held back publication of 15,000 documents on Afghanistan to safeguard its “harm minimization process” even after its media partners published stories.

Redaction of the Iraq War diaries was likewise “painstakingly approached” and involved the development of special redaction software. Publication was delayed in August 2010 despite this annoying some media partners because Assange didn’t want to rush.

Un-redacted publication of the State Department cables in September 2011 was undertaken by parties unconnected to WikiLeaks, and despite WikiLeaks’ efforts to prevent it, the legal submissions state. Those who revealed un-redacted cables have never been prosecuted nor requested to remove them from the internet.

[Ed.: John Young, founder of Cryptome, testified at Assange’s hearing that he published the unredacted cables before WikiLeaks but was never questioned by police. The password to the unredacted cables was published by Guardian journalists Luke Harding and David Leigh before Cryptome did.]

For an excellent account of the origins of the slur against Assange, watch this video of Australian investigative journalist Mark Davis, who was with Assange in 2010 during the collaboration with the media partners. (Mark wasn’t one of those who chided me over the Crikey piece):

Crikey piece):

So, Assange made every effort to redact and WikiLeaks in 2011 won Australia’s Walkley Award (our equivalent to the Pulitzer Prize) for its outstanding contribution to journalism.

Not a Single One

Further evidence Assange sought to protect individuals came at Chelsea’s court-martial in 2013. Brigadier-General Robert Carr testified that his team of 120 counter-intelligence officers couldn’t find a single person killed in Afghanistan and Iraq because of the disclosures. [Ed.: Nevertheless, U.S. prosecutors at the extradition hearing made harming U.S. informants the centerpiece of their case.]

Let’s talk about what is indisputable, who really was endangered and by whom.

The United States of America jeopardized the lives of Iraq’s entire 25 million people with an illegal and reckless invasion based on the lies that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and had direct ties to al Qaeda.

It’s indisputable that hundreds of thousands of Iraqi combatants and civilians were killed in the eight-year war because of violence and war-related causes. (Research in 2013 put the total at 400,000). It’s indisputable that four million Iraqis fled their country. Millions more were displaced internally.

It’s reasonable to say millions of Iraqis were wounded by violence or suffered illness from war-related causes. It’s fair to say millions of Iraqis will struggle with trauma and mental illness for life, that a countless number have already killed themselves.

American families suffered too: 4,431 U.S. soldiers were killed in the war and 31,994 wounded. Hundreds of thousands of American veterans have PTSD or moral injury, affecting millions of loved ones and friends. Same goes for any other foreigner who spent time in Iraq – soldier, security contractor, truck driver, cook, journalist.

And in case people think the Iraq War is over, Islamic State rose from its ashes. Yet no American government or military leader has ever been held to account for the lies and misrepresentations over Iraq. Meanwhile, the United States brazenly misrepresents the facts in its case against Assange with the blessing of successive Australian governments.

That’s why we need to make Assange’s freedom an election issue in Australia. It’s why we need to make noise on social media, in the mainstream media, to politicians, and on the streets. Because Assange is being tortured in a foreign country for telling the truth about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he will be extradited to America where he will likely die in prison.

Remember — the Australian government eagerly took part in the invasion of Iraq. His case is the biggest test of press freedom in decades. Make some noise Australians! Bring Assange home.

Re-published from Facebook with permission from the author.

Dean Yates was Baghdad bureau chief for Reuters from January 2007 to October 2008. The U.S. military stonewalled Reuters’ attempt to get the cockpit video of the July 12, 2007 attack until WikiLeaks released it as “Collateral Murder.”

Jan 052022 doctor that helped create mRNA 30 years Vaccinology

On gettr  (twitter alternative):

On Facebook:

United we stand, in peace we march.

January 23, 2022 | Washington, DC


We want to be…free.

The mandates are un-American.

We’re coming home.


Jan 052022

From Children’s Health Defense

Any emergency stay issued by the Supreme Court would not constitute a final ruling but would freeze enforcement of COVID vaccine mandates for businesses and healthcare workers until legal challenges make their way through the federal appeals courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 7 will convene a special session to hear oral arguments in two cases related to the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandates.

The two cases pertain to the mandates imposed on private businesses with 100 or more employees, and healthcare facilities participating in the Medicare or Medicaid programs.

The Supreme Court announced Dec. 22, 2021, it would hold a special session to hear both cases, following a series of decisions in lower courts that successively implemented and lifted injunctions against the two mandates.

In both disputes, the formal legal question at hand pertains to whether the federal government can continue enforcing the mandates while legal challenges against them work their way through the judicial system.

In the first instance, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling Dec. 17, 2021, lifted an injunction against Biden’s vaccine mandate for private businesses previously issued by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The mandate is now set to come into force on Jan. 4, though the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will not begin enforcement of the rule until Jan. 10. The mandate, if and when it is enforced, will impact an estimated 84 million U.S. workers.

Immediately following the 6th Circuit Court ruling, 27 states and several business groups, companies and ministries submitted applications to the Supreme Court seeking an emergency stay.

Two of these requests, one filed by a trade group and the other by a group of states led by Ohio, were formally accepted for oral argument.

These groups were joined by more than 170 Republican lawmakers who on Dec. 30, 2021, jointly filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing OSHA has no legal authority to impose a vaccine mandate on private businesses.

The Supreme Court, via Justice Brett Kavanaugh — whose jurisdiction includes the 6th Circuit — asked the Biden administration to submit a response to the legal challenges by Dec. 30, 2021.

In its response, Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar argued the Biden administration possesses the authority, under federal law, to impose the mandate and the Supreme Court should not block a program that will save thousands of lives.

The Supreme Court will also hear arguments pertaining to Biden’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers at facilities that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid funding. This rule is estimated to impact more than 17 million workers across the U.S.

In this instance, it was the Biden administration that filed an emergency request with the court, requesting it be allowed to temporarily enforce the healthcare worker mandate, which is currently blocked in 24 states following a series of injunctions issued by lower courts.

A brief filed with the Supreme Court by 14 Republican-led states described the mandate as “plainly unlawful.”

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service, which oversees the healthcare mandate, announced Dec. 29, 2021, it will begin enforcing the mandate in the 26 states where it is not blocked.

A modified enforcement timeline accompanied this announcement: Healthcare workers will now be required to receive the first dose of a COVID vaccine by Jan. 27, and the second dose by Feb. 28.

The Supreme Court’s move to hold oral arguments in deciding whether or not to issue an emergency stay is considered unusual. Typically, such cases are placed on the “shadow docket” and are decided without a full briefing or a presentation of oral arguments.

In this instance though, the Supreme Court may seek to alleviate the uncertainty which exists among employers and workers who remain unsure as to whether they are subject to a mandate or not.

It remains unclear whether a decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the injunctions against the healthcare worker mandate will impact all 50 states or only the 24 where the mandate is currently blocked.

Any emergency stay issued by the Supreme Court would not constitute a final ruling regarding either case, but would freeze the enforcement of the two mandates until legal challenges make their way through the federal appeals courts before, most likely, ending up in the Supreme Court for a full hearing.

Separate Biden administration mandates pertaining to such categories as federal contractors and military personnel also have been challenged legally.

In the most recent such example, Judge James “Wesley” Hendrix of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled against a mask and vaccine mandate for participants in federal Head Start programs. The rules were set to take effect by the end of January.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton described the ruling as “a win for the children of Texas.”

However, the Supreme Court will not examine any of these other Biden administration mandates in the Jan. 7 special session.

While the Supreme Court previously rejected requests for emergency stays against state-level vaccine mandates, the court is also viewed as one that is skeptical of the power of federal agencies to issue mandates relating to COVID countermeasures.

This stance was evident, for instance, when the court lifted a moratorium on evictions imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the basis it was outside the agency’s authority.

Notably, a well-known Supreme Court decision from 1905, Jacobsen v. Massachusetts, which, according to proponents of vaccine mandates, sets a legal precedent for their legality, actually pertains to state-level mandates.

This argument was made by the state of Arizona in its lawsuit against the OSHA mandate, as previously reported by The Defender.

The lack of a federal-level precedent may therefore weigh into the justices’ decision.

Jan 032022

Long, but great read.

RCMP member sent on unpaid leave writes this powerful letter you must read:

Hi everyone,

Since most members make a goodbye email before they leave, I figured I should as well, despite the “special” circumstances around my departure. Anyways, my time here in the RCMP is up. For now. The low T wannabe tyrants in Ottawa have decided that I can no longer serve as a police officer because I refuse to tell them if I have submitted to their “vaccine” edict. I’ve served in the RCMP for 21 years and one of the first things I said to any person I ever arrested was “you don’t have to say anything to me.” Unfortunately, our government has told me that I have to tell them what’s in my body, and if the right drug is not inside me, I have to get it as condition of my continuing employment, human rights be damned. Why did I put vaccine in quotations above you ask? More on that later. Buckle up and tighten the straps on your government mandated shame muzzle, this goodbye email will likely ruffle some feathers.

My journey to this point of our dystopian, medical, apartheid state started like many of yours. Watching the television almost 2 years ago as reports started coming in of some strange virus out of Wuhan. I was a little concerned, but not much. You see, for the last 10 years of my life I had spent a lot of time as an amateur researcher of history and learned to my dismay that the official narrative of most events is usually a little suspect at best. Like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or the January 6th “insurrection” in D.C., the examples are sadly numerous.

I’ve also always been a very independent person. Following the herd has never appealed to me. When a belief is put forth to me I always evaluate it for myself and don’t simply accept it’s veracity based on the authority behind it. For example, during the last Federal Government census, I could not help but notice that the gender section had 3 boxes. Male, Female and other, which was a blank box. For real, the Federal Government of Canada allowed you to make up your own gender on the last official census. I found this to be a combination of amusing and insane. Feeling particularly bull headed and cheeky at the time, I naturally chose Minotaur as my gender. Yes, that’s right, on the Canadian government census my gender is that of a mythical giant man with the head of a bull.

So back to my Covid journey. I was skeptical of the pandemic from the start but decided to wait and see what evidence would surface of this dangerous pandemic. So I sat back and quietly observed. At that time, and still at the time I’m writing this, I was the admin NCO on the watch. I was in the unique position of seeing every file that came through PRIME in the 46 hour window I was at work each week. Naturally, this included all sudden death files. Pay attention now, have another sip of your latte if you have to. Since the pandemic began, until now, I was in a position to see every single sudden death file that came through our detachment area. What did I notice in this position? Nothing. No upwards trend whatsoever. Funny enough, I didn’t see people dropping dead in my neighbourhood either.

This was a very stark contrast to what I saw in media. A non-stop chorus on TV, radio, and internet, of case counts, hospitalizations and deaths. At no time in my life had I seen anything like it. A complete disconnect between my observed reality and that which was portrayed by my government and the government subsidized mainstream media. And they were reporting deaths in care homes. Care homes? When did the media ever report deaths in care homes unless it was some sort of instance of gross negligence? It’s called end of life care for a reason. People go to care homes at the end of their life. Death is the natural consequence, and this fact used to be understood as common sense.

When the statistics started showing that the vast majority of anyone dying from Covid, either had one or more co-morbidities, or was older than the average life expectancy, my skepticism of the pandemic narrative only grew. Then in the summer of 2020, I got Covid. For a few days I was really tired and shivered a lot. Then it was over. I survived the “deadly” disease like the vast majority of anyone else who caught it. To be honest, I’ve had worse Flus, and worse hangovers.

At the end of 2020 I became convinced we were all being force fed a giant load of absolute bullshit. Don’t believe me? Look at world population statistics. Here’s a sample. At the end of 2018, the world population was 7,631,091,040 and that year 57,625,149 people died. This showed an overall death rate of .76%. I know some of you are shocked by this, but yes, 57 million people died of all types of causes in 2018. When you reach the end of your life, you die. At the end of 2019, the world population was 7,713,468,100 and 58,394,378 died. Naturally, because we had more people reaching the end of their lives, more people died. The death rate that year was .76%. Now let’s see what 2020 brought us. The year of the pandemic. At the end of 2020, the world population was 7,794,798,739 and 59,230,795 died. The death rate was .76%. Yes. That’s right. In the year of the deadly pandemic the world’s population grew by 81,330,639 people and the death rate did not change by even a hundredth of a percent. The media never once pulled back the lens to show this, they continued to show the narrow focus of case counts and Covid deaths. Even going so far as to change causes of death so that someone who died “with” Covid in their system was counted as someone who died “of” Covid. The Western world shut down over a disease about as deadly as the common flu. And our rights were shut down along with it.
Despite this disease having a non existant effect on the overall death rate of the world’s population the call came out for a mass vaccination. Since I was already skeptical of the pandemic, I was naturally skeptical of the need for a “vaccine”. Oh look, vaccine is in quotations again. Why am I doing that?

Because it’s not a f^#king vaccine!!!

A vaccine is created when a virus from nature is made harmless in a lab and then cultivated there. The vaccine, created from the neutered virus, is then injected into a person. The body then reacts to the vaccine just like it would to the unaltered, dangerous virus. However, because the vaccine is a modified harmless version of the virus, it doesn’t cause disease and the body’s natural immunity is able to “learn” how to cope with the virus. This “learning” is lifelong and is why people develop an immunity to whatever they were inoculated against. People who have been vaccinated against Measles do not get Measles, and the same with mumps etc etc. None of the so called Covid “vaccines” meet this definition. If you were wondering why “vaccinated” people are still getting Covid, and spreading it, this is why. The fact that “vaccinated” people still get Covid and spread it should tell you that this madness will never end as long as you buy into the official narrative.

How these new Covid “vaccines” work is based on a brand new technology never used on a massive scale. Particularly in regards to the 2 “vaccines” most heavily promoted, Moderna and Pfizer. These drugs use artificial Mrna technology. Think of Mrna as the software of our bodies. The operating instructions. Pfizer and Moderna use artificial Mrna based on a computer algorithm. These instructions are encapsulated in something called a nano lipid. A nano lipid is a tiny envelope of fat. There are trillions of these nano lipids in the Pfizer and Moderna shots. Once injected they circulate through your body through your body’s lymphatic system. Upon the nano lipids dissolving, your body receives new instructions for its immune system. These instructions tell your immune system to make spike proteins which resemble the spike proteins of the Covid virus. This is the key distinction you need to be aware of. Your body is being instructed to make the very pathogen that your immune system builds a defense against. This is completely uncharted territory and nothing like this has ever been done on the human population on such a large scale. The drug companies themselves have admitted they don’t know the long term side effects. When a recent FOIA request was sent to the FDA in the US, requesting the safety data they had on the Pfizer vaccine, the FDA asked a judge for 75 years to comply with the request. Nothing sketchy there.

To make matters worse. Every single Western nation has passed legislation shielding these drug companies from civil liability, if their vaccines harm people. While this legislation was passed years ago, it still applies to the Covid “vaccines.” You heard right. If the Moderna Covid “vaccine” harms you, you cannot sue Moderna. Same with every other drug company that makes any vaccine, Covid “vaccine” or not. They all have civil liability immunity for the vaccines they manufacture. Vaccine injury compensation has been paid out in the US under a tax funded program called the vaccine injury compensation fund, not as a remedy through civil lawsuits. Established in 1986, this fund has paid out $4.4 billion in claims. In Canada, we had no such vaccine injury fund until June of 2021. Hand on chin emoji goes here.

Make no mistake here. This is a large scale drug trial and whoever was jabbed is taking part. Having educated myself about these new drugs I was very skeptical when they started promoting them. Additionally, nearly all the drug companies making Covid “vaccines” have a very checkered history in quality control and ethics. J and J has payed 9 billion in settlements throughout it’s lifetime and Pfizer has payed $4.6 billion. Not for their vaccines of course, for their other pharmaceuticals. Moderna was founded in 2010 and their Covid “vaccine” is the first product they have ever put on the market. Information has since come to light that the Moderna “vaccine” was finishing in development in December of 2019, immediately before the pandemic hit. It’s almost like they were anticipating something. Do I dare put my hand on my chin and gaze thoughtfully upwards a second time?

As I was already skeptical about the entire pandemic narrative, I decided a long time ago that I was not going to take any of these “vaccines”. So as I had decided to sit back and watch how the so called pandemic unfolded, I decided to observe the vaccination campaign. One of the first things I noticed is that people like me were completely ignored and never talked about. What do I mean by people by like me? I mean people who had Covid and recovered. Suddenly, natural immunity didn’t exist anymore. Everyone had to get the vaccine regardless of whether they had natural immunity or not. Wait….. what? No one would ever suggest someone who had measles or polio should get vaccinated against those diseases. Why was natural immunity suddenly not talked about anymore? But if you knew where and how to look, it was talked about, and studied. The largest study was in Israel where the researchers concluded that natural immunity conveyed 27 times more protection than vaccination. Not double, not triple, 27 times! Fast Forward to recent times where an attorney in the US submitted a FOIA request, to the CDC, requesting records of any patient, who had a previous Covid infection, who was subsequently re-infected and then transmitted the Covid to another person. The CDC could not produce a single record of this ever happening. Yet for some bizarre reason, neither the government nor the media will ever talk about natural immunity and Covid together.

And now we are able to see much of the results of this mass vaccination campaign. And despite what you’ve been told, it’s not good. Data from the UK is showing that vaccinated adults under 60 are dying at twice the rate of the unvaccinated. American VAERS data shows these Covid “vaccines” have caused more deaths than all other vaccines combined in the last 30 years. In Europe, FIFA data has revealed a 500% increase in cardiac events and sudden deaths in soccer players. Very recently, the American Heart Association released a study which demonstrated that Mrna “vaccines” dramatically increase markers related to heart conditions. A recent German study showed that the higher a jurisdictions’ vaccination rate, the higher it’s mortality rate. On November 11th of this year, a Doctor Nagase came forward to report a record 13 still born births, in a 24 hour period, at BC Children’s hospital. They average 1 per month. During a very recent Ontario provincial parliament debate, MP Rick Nicholls confronted the health minister about a sharp rise in still births from vaccinated pregnant women in Ontario. All he got for his efforts was deflection. Despite this new evidence beginning to come light, there has been absolute silence in the media. Instead, they now want to vaccinate our children. Children are at a near zero risk from Covid. Vaccinating children with these experimental drugs, with unknown long term side effects, which are starting to show increasing adverse effects, is absolutely criminal.
Since I refuse to go along with this coerced “vaccination” campaign, I am being forced onto Leave without pay. Despite the fact that approximately 70% of the Federal workforce gets testing as an option, for some inexplicable reason, the RCMP, the CBSA and Federal Corrections have a mandatory vaccination order. I refuse to go along with this. This is nonsensical, illegal and unethical. I will continue to refuse and I have obtained legal representation, along with hundreds of other federal employees. We will get our day in court and we will win. Some may ask where our union stands on the issue. The answer is they didn’t. Our union leadership immediately bent the knee and offered no resistance whatsoever. Despite these setbacks, those who are fighting this know we have the truth on our side. The truth, at the moment, may be mere pebbles rolling down a slope. This will inevitably become an avalanche. So in reality, this isn’t a goodbye email, it’s a “see you in 2022” email.

Before I go, let me say this. Don’t be afraid. The government, and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media, have promoted a nonstop campaign of fear for almost 2 years now. Turn off your television and radios. Do your own research and question everything. Knowledge begins with asking questions. With each new variant they will try and frighten you, despite the fact that never in the history of virology has a virus ever mutated to become more deadly. Selective pressures always favour a more contagious, but less deadly mutation. The new “scariant” is Omicron. They don’t tell you that they skipped Mu and Xi in the Greek alphabet. Why? Because Mu or Xi just don’t sound scary. When you hear some brain dead parrot repeat the talking point “trust the science,” politely ask them to provide a definition of science. They never can because they don’t know. What they are really saying, but are too stupid to realize, is that they are saying “trust authority and don’t ask questions.” This, my friends, is the antithesis of science.

And get some sunshine. The latest German study, you know, actually science, showed an inverse relationship between vitamin d and Covid mortality rates. The study showed, given high enough vitamin d levels, a mortality rate of zero could be achieved. In addition, please don’t let them inject this “vaccine” into your children. Why on earth would you allow an experimental drug to be injected into your children, from pharmaceutical companies that have a history of civil litigation settlements, where these same companies have blanket legal immunity from the vaccines they create, for a disease that your children are completely safe from? It’s insanity. And the latest video where Trudeau explains he is excited to begin vaccinating children, looks completely psychotic and unhinged. Keep these lunatics away from your children. Your children are going to be just fine with their natural immunity.

I don’t know how many people will get to read this. I suspect that once certain ranks are aware of this email it will be pulled from the server. That right there speaks volumes in itself. Silencing the last message of a 21 year veteran who was forced to leave simply because he didn’t tell the government whether he had a drug in his body or not, doesn’t portray a leadership of transparency or good faith. On the contrary, it demonstrates both cowardice and a complete betrayal of any professed principles. Before I go, if any of you believe in courage and freedom. You aren’t alone. In fact, many members feel this way and they have created their own website: Another concerned group of freedom loving Canadians has created Check them out when you have time.

Anyways, I have taken up too much of your time as it is. Always laugh at those who would spread fear, and see you in 2022.

Corporal Richard Mehner, your “vaccine” free Minotaur
P.S. Chief Supt. De La Gogondiere,
I taped a copy of this letter on your office door, Martin Luther style. If you don’t understand the historical reference I invite you to look it up.


(Courtesy of Easton

Dec 242021


2021-10-08 Mandatory vaccination for B.C. school staff up to boards, says B.C. premier


BC school district boards vote against vaccine mandate for staff. SD69 joins the Campbell River, Vancouver, Surrey, Abbotsford, New Westminster, Langley and Powell River school districts in not implementing a vaccine mandate for employees.

Decision made during in-camera discussion

The School District 69 (Qualicum) Board of Education has decided against a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for teachers, educational assistants, administration, custodians and bus drivers.

Board chair Eve Flynn said the decision was made during an in-camera discussion late last month.

“In recognition of our high community vaccination rates and our continuing with in-school safety protocols, including masking and hand sanitizing, we believe, at this time, School District 69 will not mandate vaccines for our employees,” she said.

Flynn’s motion, seconded by trustee Julie Austin, was unanimously carried.

READ MORE: Mandatory vaccination for B.C. school staff up to boards, says B.C. premier

“It was always the position of the BCTF (British Columbia’s Teachers’ Federation) that the government take responsibility for making that decision. And that they pushed it onto school boards, including ours, was not one that was supported by the BCTF,” said Matt Woods, president of the Mount Arrowsmith Teachers’ Association. “MATA appreciates the time and consideration that this board has taken to arrive at this difficult decision. And we support you with this decision.”

SD69 joins the Campbell River, Vancouver, Surrey, Abbotsford, New Westminster, Langley and Powell River school districts in not implementing a vaccine mandate for employees.

On Oct. 22, B.C.’s Ministry of Education issued guidelines to help school boards implement a vaccine policy, but ultimately left the decision up to individual school boards.

Dec 232021

B.C. Premier John Horgan speaks after the B.C. Lions CFL football team announced they would recognize the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in Vancouver on Thursday, September 16, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl DyckB.C. Premier John Horgan speaks after the B.C. Lions CFL football team announced they would recognize the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in Vancouver on Thursday, September 16, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

Mandatory vaccination for B.C. school staff up to boards, says B.C. premier

Horgan: Mandatory vaccines a last resort and elected trustees best know what’s needed

  • Oct. 8, 2021 9:30 a.m.Vaccine mandates for workers in British Columbia’s schools are a last resort and elected board trustees know what’s needed for their communities rather than the province enforcing such decisions, says Premier John Horgan.Parent groups and the BC Teachers’ Federation have called for all school districts to introduce a COVID-19 vaccine mandate in the absence of a provincewide order, while the New Westminster board of education has asked for a legal opinion on making the shots mandatory.

    Horgan told a news conference Thursday that he understands the anxiety parents have to protect their children and to make sure that governments and school boards are doing everything they can to keep kids safe.

    “It’s good to see stakeholders, critical people like teachers, represented by the BC Teachers Federation (and) CUPE workers, the largest body of people in the K-12 system, their leadership saying that a mandate is the logical next step,” he said.

    “I’m confident that school districts will be agreeable to that.”

    Health officials are ready to ensure that all those who want to get a COVID-19 vaccine will get one, but the province isn’t the employer in this case, Horgan said.

    “There is a responsibility for elected representatives who put their hand up and said ‘I’d like to be on the school board’ to inform themselves about the best way to protect their employees and the children within their district.”

    Three B.C. school districts voted on their own to expand the mask mandate to students in kindergarten to Grade 3 last week, prompting the provincial health officer to impose the change provincewide starting Oct. 4.

    Also Thursday, an independent group that analyzes the pandemic in B.C. released new modelling, which said cases among children rose steeply in the Fraser, Interior and Vancouver Island health authorities as they account for nearly half of the province’s unvaccinated residents.

    COVID-19 infections among those under 12 are higher than at any other time in the pandemic, it said, predicting at least 20 per cent will have had the virus within two years.

    The report by 12 epidemiologists, mathematicians and data analysts, from the universities of Victoria and British Columbia, Simon Fraser University and the private sector, covers the period up to Oct. 4.

    Pfizer Canada said it is preparing to seek Health Canada’s authorization for its COVID-19 vaccine for children aged five to 11 by mid-October.

    It submitted data to the Canadian government last week from a clinical trial on children that age, but hadn’t formally requested authorization.

    The vaccine was authorized for people at least 16 years old in December 2020 and for teenagers between 12 and 15 in May.

    Horgan said officials in B.C. are working on logistics of delivering the vaccines to children if and when that approval comes.

    The modelling report said the younger children will benefit if a vaccine is approved for their age group and that would help prevent the spread to adults, including those who are older and unvaccinated.

    Pressure on B.C.’s intensive care units remains near peak levels but COVID-19 cases stabilized through September due to masking, vaccination and other public health measures, the report said.

    The province reported 624 new cases of COVID-19 Thursday, bringing the total number of active infections to 5,929. It also reported four more deaths, which brings the total number of fatalities to 1,996.

    The Northern Health authority announced Thursday that only essential visitors would be allowed in any department of the University Hospital of Northern B.C. after outbreaks were declared in two in-patient units, and because of the general rates of COVID-19 locally.

    BC Hydro said in a news release that it will require proof of COVID-19 vaccination for all employees and contractors working at their facilities, including the construction location for the Site C project.

    The Crown corporation set Nov. 22 as a deadline for its employees to be fully vaccinated. Consultants and employees of contractors and subcontractors will be required to be fully vaccinated by Jan. 10, it said.

    — By Hina Alam, The Canadian Press

Dec 232021

Japan’s Vaccination Policy: No Force, No Discrimination

Japan’s ministry of health is taking a sensible, ethical approach to Covid vaccines. They recently labeled the vaccines with a warning about myocarditis and other risks. They also reaffirmed their commitment to adverse event reporting to document potential side-effects.

Japan’s ministry of health states: “Although we encourage all citizens to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, it is not compulsory or mandatory. Vaccination will be given only with the consent of the person to be vaccinated after the information provided.”

Furthermore, they state: “Please get vaccinated of your own decision, understanding both the effectiveness in preventing infectious diseases and the risk of side effects. No vaccination will be given without consent.”

Finally, they clearly state: “Please do not force anyone in your workplace or those who around you to be vaccinated, and do not discriminate against those who have not been vaccinated.”

They also link to a “Human Rights Advice” page that includes instructions for handling any complaints if individuals face vaccine discrimination at work.

Other nations would do well to follow Japan’s lead with this balanced and ethical approach.

This policy appropriately places the responsibility for this healthcare decision with the individual or family.

We can contrast this with the vaccine mandate approach adopted in many other Western nations. The U.S. provides a case study in the anatomy of medical coercion exercised by a faceless bureaucratic network.

A bureaucracy is an institution that exercises enormous power over you but with no locus of responsibility. This leads to the familiar frustration, often encountered on a small scale at the local DMV, that you can go round in bureaucratic circles trying to troubleshoot problems or rectify unfair practices. No actual person seems to be able to help you get to the bottom of things—even if a well-meaning person sincerely wants to assist you.

Here’s how this dynamic is playing out with coercive vaccine mandates in the U.S. The CDC makes vaccine recommendations. But the ethically crucial distinction between a recommendation and mandate immediately collapses when institutions (e.g., a government agency, a business, employer, university, or school) require you to be vaccinated based on the CDC recommendation.

Try to contest the rationality of these mandates, e.g., in federal court, and the mandating institution just points back to CDC recommendation as the rational basis for the mandate. The court will typically agree, deferring to the CDC’s authority on public health. The school, business, etc., thus disclaims responsibility for the decision to mandate the vaccine: “We’re just following CDC recommendations, after all. What can we do?”

But CDC likewise disclaims responsibility: “We don’t make policy; we just make recommendations, after all.”

Meanwhile, the vaccine manufacturer is immune and indemnified from all liability or harm under federal law. No use going to them if their product—a product that you did not freely decide to take—harms you.

You are now dizzy from going round in circles trying to identify the actual decision-maker: it’s impossible to pinpoint the relevant authority. You know that enormous power is being exercised over your body and your health, but with no locus of responsibility for the decision and no liability for the outcomes.

You are thus left with the consequences of a decision that nobody claims to have made. The only certainty is that you did not make the decision and you were not given the choice.

Japan’s policy avoids most of these problems simply placing responsibility for the decision on the individual receiving the intervention, or the parent in the case of a child who is not old enough to consent.

Incidentally, this focus on choice and freedom was somewhat reflected in Japan’s policies throughout the pandemic, which were less stringent that most countries, including those in the U.S.


Aaron Kheriaty

Aaron Kheriaty is former Professor of Psychiatry at the UCI School of Medicine and Director, Medical Ethics at UCI Health.

Dec 222021
Wall Street is being “Warned” against the commodification of water?
IT’S  TOO LATE! AND TOO NICE.  The water futures market was set up a year ago.

Last year’s news about the (U.S.) Mercantile Bank’s WATER FUTURES MARKET is in the posting:

2021-02-14 The New Canada Water Agency

4.  IMPORTANT   Just before Christmas, the CME Group, the New York-based market operator that takes its name from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, began trading water futures. For the first time, Wall Street traders are now able to take a stake in the future value of water, the way they have with other agricultural and mineral commodities. So far, the water contracts being bought and sold are limited to five water districts in drought-prone California, representing a tiny fraction of the water actually used in the state. But the idea of water as something to be bought and sold by Wall Street speculators does not necessarily sit well with those who study the economics of this resource in Canada. “I find it quite disturbing,” said Jim Warren, Regina-based scholar and author of Defying Palliser: Stories of Resilience from the Driest Region of the Canadian Prairies. “I mean it’s upsetting, especially since, you know, the world will be watching and others will be thinking it’s the way to go.” Read more analysis of water trading:


The December 22 report below from Common Dreams, 30+ Groups to Wall Street: Water Is Not a Commodity  is anemic.

I regret I do not have an action item for you, beyond “please share”.

Sharpen your senses with this:

2021-08-30 40 Million People Rely on the Colorado River, But It’s Drying Up Fast. What Happens Next?

2019-08-06 The Liberal Government Says It is Looking to Privatize Municipal Water Systems Across Canada, PressProgress

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
30+ Groups to Wall Street: Water Is Not a Commodity

More than 130 civil society groups this week demanded federal regulators shut down the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s water futures market, warning Wall Street against commodifying what has been treated since ancient history as “a common right for everyone.”

Warning Wall Street against commodifying what has been treated since ancient history as “a common right for everyone,” more than 130 civil society groups this week demanded that federal regulators shut down the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s water futures market.

Food & Water Watch organized the petition, which was sent to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a year after the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) opened the world’s first market for water futures contracts, based on water rights in drought-plagued California.

“Water index futures trades are contrary to the public interest as they involve the trade of an essential resource,” wrote the groups, which also included Public Citizen, For Love of Water (FLOW), the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP).

The organizations argued that the CME’s water futures market — which the exchange self-certified before its launch, assuring the CFTC that it met the requirements of the commission’s regulations — undermines California state law and violates the CFTC’s own trading restrictions.

“Water is necessary and essential for life and is simply not a commodity,” said Zach Corrigan, senior attorney for Food & Water Watch. “The commission should reject this shoe-horn attempt to drive investor profit under a federal law never meant to apply to a common public resource managed by the state for the public welfare.”

In the water futures market, called the Nasdaq Veles California Water Index Futures, market participants are able to bet on the scarcity of water in California, where 37.3 million people are currently affected by drought conditions and where 2021 was the driest year in more than a century.

Since the market opened in December 2020, participants have been able to bet on the state’s $1.1 billion spot water market, claiming quarterly contracts and placing bets on the price of 10 acre-feet of water.

As the United Nations Office of the Hugh Commissioner on Human Rights explained when the market was launched:

“The new water futures contract allows buyers and sellers to barter a fixed price for the delivery of a fixed quantity of water at a future date … As well as farmers, factories and utility companies looking to lock in prices, such a futures market could also lure speculators such as hedge funds and banks to bet on prices, repeating the speculative bubble of the food market in 2008.”

The water futures market was permitted to launch thanks to the “radically deregulatory Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000,” said Dr. Steve Suppan, senior policy analyst at IATP, which “allows exchanges to self-certify that new futures contracts comply with CFTC rules and core regulatory principles.”

Since the CME’s water futures market is “a new asset class,” Suppan said, the CFTC “must not allow self-certification.”

According to the petition, “self-certification has meant that neither the commission nor its staff have in fact evaluated whether the futures contracts are susceptible to market manipulation.”

The CFTC strictly prohibits the trade of futures that are “readily susceptible to manipulation of the price of such contract,” noted the signatories.

The groups also objected to the fact that futures contracts can be “freely traded on CME’s market, thus allowing investors to profit” — a violation of California’s “beneficial use” legal doctrine.

Under state law, water entitlements cannot “be used solely for speculation, such as ‘to store water for monopoly.’”

“Insofar as the trading in futures may lead to excess speculation and thus hoarding of the various entitlements that are [or] can be exchanged under state law, as demonstrated below, the futures market will aid and abet violations of state law — an outcome the commission should not permit,” the groups wrote in the petition.

Liz Kirkwood, executive director of FLOW, said the CME’s commodification of water violates a “fundamental human right held in trust by the states for the public,” adding that water is “not something to be speculated on by profiteers.”

“Free market advocates claim that markets create efficiency, but the outcome is usually dystopian and horrifying,” said John Aspray, an organizer with Food & Water Watch.

“In this time of global-warming-induced drought in California, the last thing we need is to gamble on our precious water resources,” said Conner Everts, executive director of the Southern California Watershed Alliance, which also signed the letter.

Originally published by Common Dreams.

Dec 212021


   School District Employees, No Vaccine Mandate – – list for BC  (as at Dec 15, 2021)  (is there a same list for other provinces & territories?)

2021-12-15   BC school district boards vote against vaccine mandate for staff.   SD69 joins the Campbell River, Vancouver, Surrey, Abbotsford, New Westminster, Langley and Powell River school districts in not implementing a vaccine mandate for employees.  



re Bryam Bridle on immunity of 5 to 11 year olds

Maybe you’ve seen this video of Dr. Bryam Bridle.  It is compelling.

You are free to use the info from it (below), for example, in conversation with your local Medical Health Officer.

How might I best distill what I have to say?   . . .  ah!  take ONE minute

If you will scroll to near the end of Bryam Bridle’s video presentation “On the Science” (  – –  less than half an inch from the end) – – –

you will find the statistics for Ontario:  there are approximately a million kids in the cohort that starts with 5-year-olds (5 to 11 year-olds).  The vaccines, experimental, are rolling out for them.

The data for Ontario for this cohort, reading from the official stats:  in 22 months one child has died from covid.  That child was immune-compromised (had a co-morbidity).  Bridle confirms what I have read repeatedly:  kids are not at risk from covid-19. 

There are definitely harms experienced from the covid vaccinations by some people (many in number).

Natural immunity is superior protection to inoculation.

Why in God’s name would you round up all the kids and vaccinate them?   One in a million, and that child with a co-morbidity?!

IF YOU DO NOT OBJECT  based on the science,  or for humanitarian reasons to protect the kids,  how about from an economic point-of-view?

What is the cost of vaccinating 1,000,000 kids? In one province alone.

Why should Canadians pay to vaccinate a million kids who are not at risk?

If you are the curious type, you might ask – – how much are we paying for the vaccine (not counting the associated costs of rolling it out).  What is the cost of production, HOW much money are they making?  Is it more, or is it less, than they themselves projected they would make?  (in the billions of dollars.)

I hope Bryam Bridle opens the eyes of a sufficient number of parents in Ontario to stop what is corrupted governance and regulatory systems.

You can’t expect the Ontario parents to fight the fight for the rest of the country.  They have a big enough battle just in Ontario.

Such a world we live in,    Take care,       Sandra

= = = = = = = = 

NOTE:  the brief commentary (below) on the video did not address my central concern:  WHY are 5 to 11 year-olds being vaccinated?  It makes no sense (except to those who are making the money).

Folks are lined up around the block to get their rapid tests in time for Christmas.  So maybe its time to ask some questions. Are they being promoted and used the way they should be? Or is it another expensive and useless program that has you testing yourself at a time when you don’t have the plague anyways? Dr. Bridle explains

It’s not that they can’t detect the disease, they can. It’s just that the Central Scrutinizers only want you to use the tests when you’re not sick.

Some links to what the good doctor is talking about. Public Health Ontario and Shoppers Drug Mart

After talking about the rapid tests Dr. Bridle goes over PCR tests and mask wearing. Interesting thing about the masks, they put hair dressers at far more risk than if they weren’t worn at all.