Sandra Finley

2024-08-16 Ontario’s Amish community faces unprecedented fines ($400,000) and legal hurdles, because of the ArriveCan App. They don’t use phones, let alone smartphones; “Apps” are unknown. By Rebel News.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 162024
 

WITH THANKS TO REBEL NEWS, EZRA LEVANT

 

https://www.rebelnews.com/amish_community_under_attack_over_digital_mandates_they_didnt_know_existed?utm_

. . .  Ezra reveals how Ontario’s Amish community is under siege, facing unprecedented fines and legal hurdles.

In the serene countryside of Chatsworth, a community of Amish farmers lives as if in the 18th century, adhering strictly to their faith and traditions.

Their simple way of life — without electricity (INSERT, Sandra:  from the Ontario grid – they do use electricity from their own diesel-powered generator); without telephones, or the internet — sets them apart from the rest of the modern world. Yet, this peaceful community is now grappling with a problem no one would have expected: a heavy-handed government bent on enforcing digital compliance.

The Amish, originally from Europe, found refuge in North America, escaping persecution in countries like the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland.

They settled in regions like Pennsylvania in the United States; and in Canada, where they could live according to their beliefs. Hollywood has romanticized the Amish way of life, as seen in the Harrison Ford movie Witness, which highlighted their detachment from modern society.

Renewed persecution began with the Canadian government’s enforcement of the ArriveCan app during the COVID-19 pandemic. This app was mandatory for anyone entering Canada, requiring travelers to submit their health information digitally.

The Amish, however, do not use smartphones, let alone apps. They also have religious exemptions from vaccinations, making the use of such technology unnecessary and intrusive for them. Yet, despite these clear exemptions, the government insisted on compliance, leading to severe penalties.

The result? The Amish community in Chatsworth has been slapped with nearly $400,000 in fines for not using the ArriveCan app. This is a community that doesn’t use electricity, let alone digital applications.

The fines were not just a bureaucratic oversight — they were a targeted action. The government went so far as to place liens on their properties, effectively freezing their ability to obtain loans and transfer land titles within families. These punitive measures have left the Amish community in a state of shock and despair.

Imagine being a farmer in need of a loan to buy cattle, only to be told that your property has a lien on it because of fines related to an app you cannot even use.

This situation is not just an attack on the Amish economy; it’s a direct assault on their religious freedoms. The government’s actions have created an uneven playing field, where a community that lives without modern conveniences is being punished for not participating in a digital system. It’s a blatant case of bureaucratic bullying, and it’s happening right under our noses.

Fortunately, The Democracy Fund has stepped in. They’ve begun taking up the cases of these Amish families, working to overturn the unjust fines and remove the liens placed on their properties. However, the road ahead is long and fraught with challenges, especially given the unique nature of the Amish community’s way of life.

The Amish may not fight back themselves — they are pacifists by nature — but they have welcomed the help of others who see the injustice in what’s happening.

This is not just a fight for the Amish; it’s a fight for religious freedom and the right to live according to one’s beliefs without government interference.

It’s time to stand with the Amish and ensure that their way of life, so different yet so enriching to the fabric of our society, is protected from unwarranted government intrusion.

campaign=buzz_08_16_24&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel

2024-08-16 Day 41 of the Lich/Barber trial, with thanks to The Democracy Fund

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 162024
 
Day 41 of the Lich/Barber trial

Tamara Lich Trial Highlights: August 15, 2024
OTTAWA: Day 41 began with closing submissions of Diane Magas – counsel for Chris Barber.

Ms. Magas focused her arguments on the mens rea – or subjective intent – of her client. She noted that a conviction can only follow if a court finds that the accused had the required state of mind and actually committed the offence. She referred to text and video of her client at specific times during the protest.

She noted that the Crown cannot simply refer to the group mischief that occurred during the freedom convoy protest: the Crown must prove each element of the offence against each of the accused.

Ms. Magas noted that her client’s original plan was to slow-roll his truck from Alberta and Saskatchewan. However this plan changed as trucks approached Ottawa. At this time, there was no concern or discussion about “gridlock.” She says Barber, in actions and words, was morally innocent – his intent was to protest peacefully using a slow-roll of his truck.

She said that, as the protest progressed and trucks entered Ottawa, a lack of planning by police caused gridlock: the OPS underestimated the amount of protesters and had no appropriate plan to contain or move them. She referred to the testimony of one officer who acknowledged that “the event exceeded our capacity.” She showed a video of Barber; he claimed police told him to park on Wellington – thus, presumably, he cannot be said to intend to block Wellington. Other truckers arrived, parked in the downtown core and began to gridlock the city. She said that as people left the protest, the police did not handle the removal properly – which contributed to the continuing gridlock. For example, vehicles driving out of the city encountered barriers that police had erected to prevent entry.

Ms. Magas also referred to a text to Barber where a protester says, “we need to gridlock.” Barber later answers that “it’s already locked: we trainwrecked it.” Ms. Magas argued that there was no intent to gridlock the city since it had already occurred. Regarding the meeting about causing city-wide traffic congestion, about which Lich said, “I don’t want to make that decision on my own,” Ms. Magas contended that Lich may have contacted Barber because he’s a reasonable, level-headed person – this, she said, this is a plausible interpretation of the exchange. Ms. Magas referred to numerous texts from her client where he told truckers not to venture into residential areas, not to gridlock roads and to leave emergency lanes open.

Ms. Magas argued that her client was communicating with, and listening to, the police: he moved his truck, encouraged others to do so, and agreed to lawfully slow roll.  Ms. Magas noted that her client surrounded himself with lawyers to ensure he acted legally. He had the support of former premiers. He sought advice regarding peaceful protesting: this, she said, all goes to mens rea.

She said, however, that Barber could not control the different groups and factions: these protesters would often engage in conduct of which he disapproved.

Ms. Magas then turned to the phrase, “Hold the line.” She says the Crown claims it means “form a line together and hold it” when confronting police. However, she suggested that it can have multiple meanings. It could mean “be patient.” She refers to evidence where Barber said, “hold the line: we are all so proud of you.” The Court said it may also mean “stay true to your beliefs.”

On February 14th, in response to a question from a protester asking if he is ok, Barber said, “yes, holding the line.” But Ms. Magas noted that there was no physical protest line at this point.

Ms. Magas noted that other references also allowed for multiple meanings. Similar phrases are also used: “be strong,” “be patient,” “be peaceful,” “be safe.” She said Barber ended many of his videos differently, using different phrases.

The Court agreed that the context of each conversation will determine the meaning of a phrase.

The Court noted that at one point, the police and protesters used the same phrase, “hold the line,” when facing each other.

Mr. Magas showed a video where the phrase “hold the line” was used in reference to Charter rights. She said that Barber was there to exercise these rights. Thus, the Crown cannot contend that there is a single reasonable inference of the phrase. She said that it is not the case that each time Barber used the phrase, he encouraged intimidation: there are other reasonable interpretations.

Ms. Magas noted that the Crown said the charge of obstruction arises because Barber and Lich  “metaphorically stood shoulder to shoulder” with protesters. Ms. Magas. However, she noted that there is no actus reus of “metaphorically” standing together. The Court suggested that it may be counselling if an accused tells protesters to obstruct.

Finally, Ms. Magas noted that Barber was compliant during his arrest. This, she said, showed that he was leading by example: he was demonstrating the importance of not resisting police and remaining compliant.

The Court then adjourned until August 19.

 

2024-08-15 Scotiabank de-banked a customer of 20 years. A woman of my age. Read C.L.E.A.R. on the use of CASH.

 Uncategorized  No Responses »
Aug 152024
 

This posting is an amalgam.  Thanks to C.L.E.A.R. for the info about the tug-of-war between banksters and citizens over digital currency versus cash.

Thanks to Rebel News for the variety of reports, such as the Scotiabank ARBITRARY de-banking of a 20-year client.  It’s shocking when examples are collected in a single report.

The de-banked customer could as easily (more easily, given my blog) be me.

A recent story of a Scotiabank branch “de-banking” a customer of 20 years is almost unbelievable.  But so was the blocked access to bank accounts and credit cards during the covid years.

The de-banked story follows – – below this

From the C.L.E.A.R. Newsletter:

REMINDER

New Credit Card Fees & Lack of Privacy

It is starting – Use cash as much as possible – use credit cards or digital only if there is no other alternative.

The Bank of Canada is admittedly planning for digital currency. It claims that it will not replace cash – BUT – and here is the caveat, it will continue to use cash “notes for as long as Canadians want them.”

In other words, if you don’t use cash, you will lose it. Reading between the lines, it is clear that the Gov’t will simply issue press releases and polls showing most Canadians don’t use and/or don’t want cash, and then the Bank of Canada will claim it has to eliminate cash because few people are using it or want it, and it is, ironically, too costly to maintain printing the notes and coins.

https://www.bankofcanada.ca/digitaldollar/#what-digital-canadian

Bill Still, the US Patriot and author of the incredible documentary, The Money Masters, outlines the results of recent polls showing that 86% of Canadians fear the digital dollar!!! Wow.

87% of Canadians have heard or are aware of the Bank of Canada’s CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency), and 82% are strongly opposed to it!!

https://www.thestillreport.com/post/bank-of-canada-survey-86-fear-digital-dollar-the-still-report-episode-4280

More on this issue in the next newsletter!

Companies will not use digital currency if we are not using digital currency!

It will cost them too much in lost business.

Here is two awesome posters that you can distribute to all businesses to put on their entrance doors, advocating for the use of cash. Print on 8 1/2 x 11 glossy hard stock for best results.

For Business owners:

 

The dangers of digital gov’t ID and currencies are here… you need to use cash as much as possible. As recognized by Freedom Rising, there are many inherent dangers of using digital currency. What do you do, not if, but when:

The internet is down

There is a power outage

The card reader malfunctions

Your phone battery dies or doesn’t work for other reasons

WE SUGGEST YOU CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING AS WELL:

Your phone is stolen

Your passwords are co-opted

Your credit/debit card strip is damaged – needs replacing

There are errors in relation to the quantum of $$ on your card

Gov’t limits your purchases/CRA liens the balance on your card

AND MANY OTHER DANGERS

CLEAR has promoted the non-use of digital currencies and credit/debit cards as much as possible, for years.

 

Suggested Solution:

Withdraw money on Saturday/Sunday from the bank or bank machine, and then leave your money at home if you are scared to carry it with you, and just carry the amounts of cash for each day’s purchases for the week.

NO MORE CARDS!!!! NO EXCUSES!

USE CASH $$$$$$$$$

Do you want to be the next person to be “unbanked” because of your political beliefs????

Get these cards below at the CLEAR booth to give out everytime you use cash – or print your own to hand out!

Make Business sized cards to hand out at all your cash purchases!

 

Senior citizen has accounts terminated by Scotiabank apparently for criticizing DEI policy

Toronto resident ‘Jane’ tells David Menzies that Scotiabank terminated her 20-year relationship with the company because she criticized its diversity, equity and inclusion policy.

Do you remember the good old days when Canada’s big banks were all about… financial services? Savings and chequeing accounts, RRSPs, mortgages, and so on?

Increasingly, these days, thanks to the virus that is “wokeness”, Canada’s big banks are actually “de-banking” certain customers. These are not deadbeat clients nor con artists. Rather, thanks to the unholy trinity of diversity, equity, and inclusion, if a bank deems a client guilty of “wrong-thought”, that customer might very well be “fired.”

This disturbing Orwellian approach to financial services surely hit a crescendo in 2022 when thousands of Canadians had their bank accounts frozen simply for making an online donation to the Freedom Convoy. It was equal parts shocking and disgraceful.

And consider our story last year, in which we drew attention to the case of Gary Duke of Grand Prairie, Alta. He was fired as a customer by his local Scotiabank branch when Gary politely asked if it was possible to remove the rainbow icon from his Scotiabank phone app given “Pride Month” had come to an end.

Those comments were not appreciated nor tolerated, and in the name of “inclusivity”, Gary had his bank accounts terminated.

Our latest example of wokeness driving bank policy is the inexplicable case regarding Toronto senior citizen “Jane” (she doesn’t want her real name used as she doesn’t want to incur further penalization from any other banks).

Earlier this year, a Scotiabank branch in west end Toronto terminated her accounts. But why? Was Jane running a financial scam? Does she have links to a terrorist organization? Hardly.

Jane suspects she was given the axe because she dared make a suggestion regarding the bank’s diversity, equity and inclusion policy. Which is to say, she suggested that the bank should include seniors in its inclusion policy, not just members of the LGBT-etc.-etc. community.

Alas, for having the temerity to make such a suggestion, Jane was sent a letter from bank manager Guy Morin telling her that the bank was terminating its relationship with her.

And get this: we can only speculate what the real reason is for this termination, given that the bank manager would not state anything tangible for Jane getting the axe.

Indeed, this is what Guy Morin stated to Jane in an email:

After careful consideration, The Bank of Nova Scotia… has decided to end our relationship with you. We understand it will take time for you to make arrangements with another financial institution, therefore we are providing you this advance notice of the date on which each of your accounts and other products/services will be closed. Our decision complies with the conditions in the agreements you have with us.

But again, the question arises: what “conditions in the agreement” did Jane breach? We reached out to the manager and Scotiabank’s media relations department and even paid a visit to the branch, but no comment was offered. Of note, even though we are firmly entrenched in the month of August, this branch still had its Pride propaganda on full display.

The censorious behaviour of Canada’s big banks is shocking albeit hardly surprising. After all, back in December 2021, the Toronto head office for the Royal Bank of Canada cancelled a mortgage for a Calgary property that Rebel News was hoping to acquire.

Please note that our company had been pre-approved for the mortgage by a Royal Bank branch in Calgary. But when it came to rubber-stamping the approval at Royal Bank HQ in Toronto, the mortgage application was denied.

The reasons for the refusal had absolutely nothing to do with the financial wellbeing of Rebel News. Rather, the woke Royal Bank head honchos apparently didn’t care for our editorial viewpoint. Unbelievable…

Lesson learned: Canada’s big banks no longer solely judge clients on their financial merits. These days, the banks want to make certain their clients are not guilty of “wrong thought.” And if you are deemed guilty of harbouring a non-woke opinion, then these big banks will think nothing of declaring you persona non grata

 

2024-08-07 Implications. Biden/Harris Team REVEALS How They Manipulated Voters to Think Biden’s Mental Decline was “Disinformation”. Link to The Orf Report. Plus Flashback to Tim Walz’ snitch-line (Kamala Harris’ running mate).

 Democracy requirements, deficits, solutions  No Responses »
Aug 092024
 

(Re  Implications.  The “revealing” was not intentional.   But it is very revealing to me.  Distressing because these are youngish people doing this.  It is as though they are oblivious to WHAT they are doing.  They are using their talents to help drive the USA further into fascism.  Dragging everyone else along with them.)

RECLAIM THE NET (from the UK).  Newsletter,  2024-08-09,
MASSAGING ONLINE NARRATIVES

How the Biden Campaign Redefined Misinformation to Control the Online Narrative
Evidence keeps piling up that the use of the terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” has become the ultimate tactic to manipulate and censor people and content, invalidate legitimate arguments, and control the narratives.

Matt Orfalea writes about the case of Joe Biden, and the effort his team put into trying to convince voters that any (as it turned out, completely legitimate) talk about the president’s mental decline was “disinformation.”

Related: Biden’s New Frontier: Targeting “Misinformation” Around The World 
A Zoom call between three members of that team has now surfaced, dating to the 2020 campaign, when questions were already being asked about the state of health of then-candidate Biden.

And according to them – the manipulative methods that they discuss, designed to dispel those concerns – supposedly resulted in Biden receiving 200,000 more votes than he would have.

Biden-Harris digital director Rob Flaherty, Biden’s Rapid Response Director Becca Rinkevich (after the election, the White House Deputy Director of Digital Strategy), and DNC Counter-Disinformation Program creator and lead analyst Tim Durigan were on the call when they spoke about how to counter “misinformation” regarding Biden’s health and other issues.

Flaherty, who is now Deputy Campaign Manager for Kamala Harris, is considered a key figure in the censorship efforts of the Biden administration during the past four years and is known for trying to influence social media like Facebook to silence Covid vaccine skeptics, including journalist Tucker Carlson.

At one point, Orfalea writes, he even refused to define “misinformation” while under oath.

However, Flaherty was more than comfortable talking about it during the video call, and pinpointing what “misinformation narratives” would be – for example, people discussing Biden’s corruption record, or the state of his mental fitness, among other similarly damaging topics to the then-candidate.

It proceeds from this that the definition of “misinformation” would be – “anything that the Biden team found inconvenient,” Orfalea notes.

Rinkevich agreed that discussing Biden’s mental decline was to be treated as “disinformation.”

And, ironically, even though legacy media – searching for any explanation for the outcome of the 2016 ballot, other than the will of the voters – mercilessly criticized Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, the Biden campaign team embraced Cambridge Analytica’s “psychographic targeting.”

“We targeted folks based on online behavioral cues, building out personas, based on the type of content they were consuming, what they were searching, the kinds of websites they were visiting so that we could target folks in real-time as they were exposed to that disinformation,” said Rinkevich.

Then there’s “true misinformation” (what would be the opposite of that, one wonders).

Tim Durigan didn’t, instead concurring that “true misinformation” was “a huge problem.”

Writes Orfalea: “(Durigan) wants social media to suppress ‘true misinformation’ to promote ‘authoritative’ news sources like NYT. Big Tech’s done that since ’18, but apparently not enough for Durigan.”

Get the full post here.
 

FLASHBACK

Walz’s 2020 Covid Snitch Hotline Sparks Debate Amid VP Bid
In 2020, as the reaction to the Covid pandemic tightened its global grip, the administration of Minnesota’s Democratic Governor, Tim Walz, controversially initiated a hotline encouraging citizens to report non-compliant neighbors, opening a Pandora’s box of surveillance reminiscent of dystopian literature.

This move has once again sparked discussion about Walz, following his newly-minted status as the running mate for Vice President Kamala Harris in the imminent 2024 presidential election.

Serving a dual purpose, the hotline — referred to by critics as the Covid snitch line — enabled thousands of Minnesotans to both voice their concerns about perceived health risks and expose those allegedly flouting the restrictive coronavirus-sensitive rules revolving around gatherings and social activities.

Watch the clip here.

Referred to by some as “the Office of Public Safety Stay At Home Hotline,” the service became a platform for callers to report everything from religious congregation activities to outdoor sports events.

The line even reportedly recorded concerns about a local church’s activities potentially violating the mandated rules.

Complaints received via the hotline were varied in nature. Anything from unmasked shopping for nonessential items to unsanctioned social gatherings was fair game, echoing mistrust amongst friends and neighbors in the wake of the controversial crackdown.

 

Biden/Harris Team Reveals How They Manipulated Voters to Think Biden’s Mental Decline was “Disinformation”

Matt Orfalea – Orf Report
Aug 07, 2024

2024-08-08 Lawfare, what is it?

 Rule of Law  No Responses »
Aug 072024
 

Lawfare – – meaning?

Using the law as a weapon of war.   (short and simple – – I like that!)

I am seeing the word used more and more.

Take a look under “Numerous charges dropped during August” in this 2023 posting.  The war to take away Free Speech, Bodily Autonomy, etc. Charter Rights – –  the Government uses lawfare to coerce, intimidate, and force citizens who oppose into bankruptcy.  We resist.

2023-09-10 For your Selection, Updates on Covid Court Challenges. Numerous charges dropped during August. Big in US – an appeals Court finds that Biden Admin did censor free speech.

Every month, for almost a year, I report on more court cases;  charges being dropped,  And still they don’t stop.  They don’t learn.  They persist in using the Courts to thrash people.  Recent is the example of the Amish.

They don’t learn because their agenda is not Justice.  They are the Kings and Courtiers.  They want to control, to dictate.

War – a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.  The definition evolves along with technology and globalization.

See also:

2024-08-21    Unwarranted criminal prosecution, definition

WIKIPEDIA SAYS:

Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual’s usage of their legal rights. The term may refer to the use of legal systems and principles against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, wasting their time and money (e.g., strategic lawsuits against public participation), or winning a public relations victory. Alternatively, it may describe a tactic used by repressive regimes to label and discourage civil society or individuals from claiming their legal rights via national or international legal systems. This is especially common in situations when individuals and civil society use nonviolent methods to highlight or oppose discrimination, persecution, corruption, lack of democracy, limiting freedom of speech, violations of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law.

Definition

The term is a portmanteau of the words “law” and “warfare”.[citation needed] Perhaps the first use of the term[original research?] “lawfare” was in the 1975 manuscript Whither Goeth the Law, which argues that the Western legal system has become overly rational and treats persons like objects as compared to so-called “Community Law”, which is based more on humanity and intuition. As an example of the use of such an approach, the Confucian Code of Propriety (Li) is mentioned, which was used in China and Korea in the past.[1][2]

A more frequently cited use of the term is found in a 2001 essay authored by Charles J. Dunlap Jr., in which Dunlap defines lawfare as “the use of law as a weapon of war”; that is, “a method of warfare where law is used as a means of realizing a military objective”.[3][4] He later expanded on the definition, describing lawfare as “the exploitation of real, perceived, or even orchestrated incidents of law-of-war violations being employed as an unconventional means of confronting” a superior military power.[5] In this sense, lawfare may be a more humane substitute for military conflict, although Dunlap considers lawfare a “cynical manipulation of the rule of law and the humanitarian values it represents”.[4]

Benjamin Wittes, Robert Chesney, and Jack Goldsmith employ the word in the name of the Lawfare website, which focuses on national security law and has explored the debate over the definition of lawfare and whether it should be considered exclusively a pejorative.[6]

Adversarial uses of legal systems by non-state actors has also been identified under the similar classification of paper terrorism, based on an analogous comparison to conventional armed terrorism.[citation needed]

Universal jurisdiction

Lawfare may involve the law of a nation turned against its own officials, but more recently it has been associated with the spread of universal jurisdiction, that is, one nation or an international organization hosted by that nation reaching out to seize and prosecute officials of another.[7]

Examples

Hundred Years’ War

French officials deployed a form of lawfare in the lead-up to the Hundred Years’ War, according to historians Iskander Rehman and David Green.[8][9] Rehman states:[8]

In the fraught decades leading up the Hundred Years War, French officials deployed their expertise in the arcane intricacies of feudal law to continuously undermine Plantagenet (English) authority over their continental territories, ‘clogging up administrative processes’, ‘interfering with fiscal activities’ and burying English officials under a deluge of legal cases.

— Iskander Rehman, Planning for Protraction

Israeli–Palestinian conflict

Both pro-Israeli groups and pro-Palestinian groups have been accused of using lawfare against one another.

Christian Aid, a British charity that does humanitarian work for Palestinians, was taken to court in 2017 by a pro-Israeli organization called “Zionist Advocacy Center”.[10] While the case was ultimately dismissed in US courts, the organization had to spend £700,000 in defending itself, and said it was an act of “lawfare” against organizations that help Palestinians.[10]

A pro-Israeli group, Shurat HaDin, acting on information from the Israeli government, is believed to have used lawfare to prevent a Gaza-bound flotilla from leaving Greece.[11]: 311–328  Many cases have been brought forward against Israeli officials and those associated with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), accusing them of war crimes. These cases have been heard in both Israel[12] and in other countries.[13] Attempts to suppress the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement have also been called lawfare.[14] In Israel and many US states, supporting the BDS movement is criminalized.[14]

The NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence has cited the alleged use of human shields by groups like Hamas as an example of lawfare, hinging on exploiting Israeli claims that they minimize civilian casualties, as well as the sensitivity of Western public opinion. This tactic allows Hamas to either accuse Israel of war crimes if civilian casualties occur or to protect its assets and continue operations if the IDF limits its military response.[15][16] According to Canadian lawmaker and former minister Irwin Cotler, the use of law to delegitimize Israel is present in five areas: United Nations, international law, humanitarian law, the struggle against racism and the struggle against genocide.[17]

People’s Republic of China

Further information: Three warfares and Unrestricted Warfare

The government of the People’s Republic of China has explicitly recognized lawfare (“falu zhan” or “legal warfare”) as an essential component of its strategic doctrine.[11]: 161–164  Lawfare is one of three components of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)’s three warfares doctrine, which was approved by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and the Central Military Commission in December 2003 to guide PLA political warfare and information influence operations.[18][19]

The activities of the People’s Republic of China in relation to the territorial disputes in the South China Sea is frequently cited example of lawfare by the Chinese government.[20][21][22] In particular, China has asserted sovereign control over several areas in the South China Sea, and has restricted access to areas within its alleged sovereign territory or exclusive economic zone.[11]: 165–168  In support of its claims, China has issued official state declarations (e.g., notes verbal) and enacted domestic laws that assert its sovereignty or effective control of portions of the sea.[20][23] China’s attempts at framing cross-strait relations with Taiwan as an internal dispute is also cited as an example of lawfare.[24] China’s 2013 creation of its Air Defense Identification Zone that cover the disputed Senkaku Islands has also been cited as lawfare.[25]

The government of China has also used lawsuits in foreign courts to repress Chinese dissidents abroad, which has also been labeled as lawfare by academic Diego A. Zambrano of Stanford Law School.[26][27][28]

Commentary

Harvard School of Law professor Jack Goldsmith, an opponent to the expansion of international human rights and universal jurisdiction, states in his book The Terror Presidency that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was concerned with the possibility of lawfare waged against Bush administration officials, and that Rumsfeld “could expect to be on top of the list”.[29][30] Rumsfeld addresses the effects of lawfare in his memoir Known and Unknown.[31]

See also

Library resources about
Lawfare

References

  1. M. Smith; D. Crossley, eds. (1975). Whither Goeth the Law – Humanity or Barbarity, The Way Out – Radical Alternatives in Australia. Melbourne: Lansdowne Press. Archived from the original on 21 May 2019. Retrieved 15 December 2006.
  2. Smith, Margaret; Crossley, David John (1975). The Way Out: Radical Alternatives in Australia. Lansdowne. ISBN 978-0-7018-0429-9. OCLC 2538964.
  3. Scharf, Michael; Andersen, Elizabeth (1 January 2010). “Is Lawfare Worth Defining – Report of the Cleveland Experts Meeting – September 11, 2010”. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law. 43 (1): 11. ISSN 0008-7254. Archived from the original on 1 March 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  4. Dunlap Jr., Charles J. (29 November 2001). “Law and Military Interventions: Preserving Humanitarian Values in 21st Conflicts” (PDF). Humanitarian Challenges in Military Interventions Conference: 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 October 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2013.
  5. Dunlap Jr., Charles J. (3 August 2007). “Lawfare amid warfare”. The Washington Times. Archived from the original on 29 April 2023. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  6. “About Lawfare: A Brief History of the Term and the Site”. Lawfare. 14 May 2015. Archived from the original on 25 May 2024. Retrieved 10 January 2024.
  7. Goldsmith, Jack (2007). The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgement Inside the Bush Administration. New York City, New York: W. W. Norton. pp. 53–64. ISBN 978-0-393-06550-3.(discussing lawfare and the spread of universal jurisdiction).
  8. Rehman, Iskander (8 November 2023). Planning for Protraction: A Historically Informed Approach to Great-power War and Sino-US Competition (1 ed.). London: Routledge. pp. 65–66. doi:10.4324/9781003464419. ISBN 978-1-003-46441-9.
  9. Green, David (1 January 2014). The Hundred Years War: A People’s History. Yale University Press. p. 53. doi:10.12987/9780300209945. ISBN 978-0-300-13451-3.
  10. Davies, Lizzy (2 March 2023). “Christian Aid claims it was subject to act of ‘lawfare’ by pro-Israel group”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on 25 May 2024. Retrieved 30 May 2024.
  11. Kittrie, Orde (2016). Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190263577.001.0001. ISBN 9780190263577.
  12. “Overview of lawfare cases involving Israel”. NGO Monitor. Archived from the original on 31 January 2016. Retrieved 13 May 2013.
  13. “Netanyahu aide skips UK trip fearing arrest”. Agence France-Presse. 4 May 2011. Archived from the original on 25 August 2011. Retrieved 13 May 2013.
  14. Asaf Siniver, ed. (27 October 2022). Routledge Companion to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-429-64861-8. Archived from the original on 25 May 2024. Retrieved 28 February 2024.
  15. “Hamas’ use of human shields in Gaza” (PDF). NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 October 2023. Retrieved 14 November 2023.
  16. James Pamment, Vladimir Sazonov, Francesca Granelli, Sean Aday, Māris Andžāns, Una Bērziņa-Čerenkova, John-Paul Gravelines, Mils Hills, Irene Martinez-Sanchez, Mariita Mattiisen, Holger Molder, Yeganeh Morakabati, Aurel Sari, Gregory Simons, Jonathan Terra, Hybrid Threats: Hamas’ use of human shields in Gaza Archived 8 January 2024 at the Wayback Machine Nato Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, 5 June 2019 pp.147-169, 152
  17. Twersky, Mordechai I. (19 May 2011). “Cotler warns of new strain in delegitimization of Israel”. The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 15 March 2013. Retrieved 13 May 2013.
  18. Clarke, Michael (2019). “China’s Application of the ‘Three Warfares’ in the South China Sea and Xinjiang” (PDF). Orbis. 63 (2): 187–208. doi:10.1016/j.orbis.2019.02.007. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 September 2020. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  19. Goldenziel, Jill I. (2020–2021). “Law as a Battlefield: The U.S., China, and the Global Escalation of Lawfare”. Cornell Law Review. 106: 1085. Archived from the original on 4 March 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2024. The Chinese military prioritizes lawfare as one of the “Three Warfares” that shape its military’s influence operations
  20. Lorteau, Steve (October 2018). “China’s South China Sea Claims as “Unprecedented”: Sceptical Remarks”. Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire Canadien de Droit International. 55: 72–112. doi:10.1017/cyl.2018.6. ISSN 0069-0058.
  21. Hsiao, Anne Hsiu-An (16 December 2016). “China and the South China Sea “Lawfare””. Issues & Studies. 52 (2): 1650008. doi:10.1142/S1013251116500089.
  22. Guilfoyle, Douglas (1 September 2019). “The rule of law and maritime security: understanding lawfare in the South China Sea”. International Affairs. 95 (5): 999–1017. doi:10.1093/ia/iiz141. ISSN 0020-5850.
  23. Dupuy, Florian; Dupuy, Pierre-Marie (2013). “A Legal Analysis of China’s Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea”. American Journal of International Law. 107 (1): 124–141. doi:10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.1.0124. S2CID 55162381.
  24. West, Michael J.; Insisa, Aurelio (March 2024). “Reunifying Taiwan with China through Cross-Strait Lawfare”. The China Quarterly. 257: 186–201. doi:10.1017/S0305741023000735. ISSN 0305-7410.
  25. Vanhullebusch, Matthias; Shen, Wei (2016). “China’s Air Defence Identification Zone: Building Security through Lawfare”. China Review. 16 (1): 121–150. ISSN 1015-6607.
  26. Rotella, Sebastian; Berg, Kirsten (22 July 2021). “Operation Fox Hunt: How China Exports Repression Using a Network of Spies Hidden in Plain Sight”. ProPublica. Archived from the original on 25 July 2021. Retrieved 25 July 2021.
  27. O’Keeffe, Kate; Viswanatha, Aruna (29 July 2020). “China’s New Tool to Chase Down Fugitives: American Courts”. The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Archived from the original on 17 August 2022. Retrieved 17 August 2022.
  28. Zambrano, Diego A. (2022). “Foreign Dictators in U.S. Court”. The University of Chicago Law Review. 89 (1): 157–252. ISSN 0041-9494. JSTOR 27093694. Archived from the original on 11 June 2023. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  29. Goldsmith, Jack (2007). The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgement Inside the Bush Administration. New York City, New York: W. W. Norton. pp. 53–64. ISBN 978-0-393-06550-3.(discussing Kissinger and Rumsfeld)
  30. Thayer, Andy (8 March 2010). “Court Allows Torture Suit Against Rumsfeld”. The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 12 March 2010. Retrieved 9 March 2009.
  31. Rumsfeld, Donald (18 February 2011). “40”. Known and Unknown. A Memoir. Sentinel. ISBN 9781595230676.

 

 

For Your Selection 2024-08-03 AUGUST 3rd

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 032024
 

Previous was:  For Your Selection 2024-07-02 Emphasis on Covid vaccines and deaths in Gov’t of Canada Reports.

 

Welcome, Newcomers.  You help make my work worthwhile!

 Choose your selections.  The information is important, but there’s too much.

If you have time, you will not regret the hour-and-a-half NCI video at the bottom by Dr Tess Lawrie (#16).

THE SELECTIONS, AUGUST 3rd

  1. 2024-08-02   UPDATED  Coutts. Jury: Carbert & Olienick NOT guilty of conspiracy to murder RCMP officers. Publication ban is now lifted.  PANEL DISCUSSION MONDAY, AUG 5TH.  EXCELLENT. Courtesy of Jason Lavigne.

2.  2024-05-24 Defend medical privacy in Nova Scotia and all of Canada. JCCF

Somehow, I missed this May announcement from JCCF (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms).  Canadians need to tell each other about the Legislation in Nova Scotia.  You CAN forward the link or start a conversation, … or (your choice!).  The investment will pay off big time!

If you don’t believe the power of a small ACTION by you,  acquaint yourself with a bit of what’s going on, down in Lethbridge.  I’ve gone in person a few times because I was incredulous.  I had to hear and see with my own ears. You will understand the NEED to talk, tell others about the N.S. Legislation.

↧ ↧

It’s a VERY short distance between the Legislation in N.S. and the Court House in Coutts, AB.

COUTTS

A suite of reports from the Lethbridge Court House by Robert Kraychik is at:   https://www.rebelnews.com/tags/trucker_trial.  Or, just click on #3  ↧ ↧   and/or   tune in to Jason Lavigne on Monday August 5th,  4 to 8  MT.  (click on Selection #1)

3.   2024-07-23 Covid: “Coutts Three” sentencing – Marco VAN HUIGENBOS REFUSES INTERVIEW FROM PROBATION OFFICER. Next sentencing hearing is on August 26.  Includes Jaclyne Martin, wife of Jerry Morin.

Do not condemn Van Huigenbos unless you know how far he has gone to help make things right at Coutts.  He is a natural leader, a Town Councillor for Fort McLeod, AB.  My observation of his actions at Coutts:  every step of the way,  until now when he’s the one being processed, the welfare of the OTHER men and their families has come before his own.  He has been thoughtful, considerate, and well-spoken – – always. He is fearless;  he was invited to address the Inquiry into the Invocation of the Emergency Act.  He went to Ottawa to do that.  He’ll be on Monday’s Panel.  You can hear and see him.

Coutts  — the Lethbridge Court House – –  have little to do with Justice.  Near the conclusion of one of the earlier court proceedings my jaw dropped open at the words of the Judge (a different judge than the one who is conducting the most recent proceedings):

The Judge offered no pretensions:  they HAD TO set an example to deter other people from protesting Government actions.  They could not countenance protesters such as this.  (Guilt or innocence is simply not a factor.  My take:  the Judge actually BELIEVED what he said.)

Think about it:  you get charged with an offence.  You are not judged on whether or not you broke the law, not on whether you are guilty or innocent, but on whether you will be used to SEND A WARNING to others,  which is “BEWARE  because this is what will happen to you if you protest”.  Who ARE these ignorant people, and HOW did they get appointed to the Bench?    (Too many, but not ALL of the judges are of this ilk.)

COVID LAWSUITS

4.   2024-07-09   Covid: Yes, Pfizer and Moderna can be sued for vaccine injuries — here’s how.  B.C. lawyer Umar Sheikh. Report by Drea Humphrey, Rebel News.

5.   2024-07-11 Covid: Ontario court rules PCR test for returning air travellers violated Quarantine Act. By Tamara Ugolini, Rebel News.

6.   2024-07-05 Ontario man (Hartman) sues Pfizer & Health Canada for wrongful death of son following COVID vaccination, by Lee Harding, Western Standard. Hartman sent tissue samples to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole. Lawyer Umar Sheikh representing.

7.   2024-07-06 US courts across the board rule against COVID mandates. By Jen Hodgson, Western Standard.

8.   2024-06-10  Employees Can Sue L.A. Schools Over COVID Vaccine Mandate Because Shots Don’t Prevent Transmission, Appeals Court Rules. From CHD.

(the covid shots don’t meet the definition of a vaccine.  Repeated from last month – – I think this is a very important court decision.  EQUAL TO lawyer Umar Sheikh’s work in Canada:  Pharma companies in Canada are not immune to Prosecution for harm done by their products, as Pharma Corps are in the USA.)

9.   2024-07-11 Democracy Fund Covid: “Fight The Fines” project results in 109 withdrawn or stayed tickets

10.   2024-07-11 Will COVID-19 VACCINE INJURY SUPPORT continue for decades, like thalidomide compensation? By Tamara Ugolini, Rebel News

11.   The Needle’s Secrets (bolus theory)

The interview by Dr. John Campbell (some of you will know him) is lengthy.  It is the explanation of an hypothesis by an engineer, Marc Girardot.

THE NEEDLE’S SECRET: UNRAVELING THE MYSTERY OF VACCINE HARM, AND THE BOLUS THEORY REVOLUTION Paperback – March 22 2024

The old adage:  Necessity is the Mother of Invention.  I believe in human ingenuity.  In times of need, passionate people will ATTEMPT to find answers and solutions.  It’s in our DNA.  It’s science.  You put forward an hypothesis which must then survive the attempts to disprove it put forward by others.  Marc Girardot’s hypothesis has survived so far.   We do not know whether he will be proven right or wrong in the end.  I have not read his book.

12.   2024-08-01   Dr. Robert Malone.  Understanding the world around us.  Lecture at Mises Institute. Centered around 5th generational warfare and surveillance capitalism.

13.   2022-07-11 Paramedics speak out about empty hospitals, probable vax injuries during COVID. By Matthew Horwood, Western Standard.    (Retrospective:  note the date)

14.   2024-06-26 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – America: Past, Present, and Future. Interview, Socrates in the City. Very good. At end, RFK Jr distills re Carl Jung’s book, “Memories, Dreams, Reflections”.

15.   2024-06-27 Tucker Carlson Responds to Julian Assange’s Release

(from last month’s listing) FOLLOW-UP  GOVT OF CANADA REPORTS – COVID VACCINE, INJURIES AND DEATHS 

July 31:

      • Canada:  The last report was Up to and including January 5, 2024 – – 488 deaths reported.
      • Canada:  The next report due was for Up to and including June 1, 2024 – –  I’ll post it here as soon as I can find it.  I’m having trouble.
      • Global:  (below) the testimony from the Regina NCI Hearings by Dr. Tess Lawrie contains a short section about injuries from covid vaccinations (global data).
SCRUBBED

I think I am seeing (not seeing!) scrubbed information – –  more reports of material “scrubbed” from Govt websites in particular.  Twenty years ago, whenever possible, I posted copies of whatever I was reporting on because material would “disappear” from the net.  I don’t like an inability to back-up what I say with the source.   Today,  I worry about too many videos.  Can’t afford the time to transcribe – – if they go down, they’re lost to me.

– – – – – – – – – –

COVID

16.   2024-05-31 NCI (National Citizens Inquiry, CAnada) – – the Regina Hearings – –Dr. Tess Lawrie.  Excellent. Excellent.

I try to include one of the NCI testimonies in each set of Selections.  The testimonies are outstanding.  /Sandra

 

2024-08-02 UPDATED Coutts. Jury: Carbert & Olienick NOT guilty of conspiracy to murder RCMP officers. Publication ban is now lifted. Panel regarding Trial & Pre-trial MONDAY, AUG 5TH. EXCELLENT. Courtesy of Jason Lavigne. On-going discussions, information.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 032024
 

INSERT, Sandra:   “Spaces” is a way to have live audio conversations on X. Anyone can join, listen, and speak in a Space on X for iOS and Android.  I do not know if a Space is different from a “Live” on X.  I don’t think so.

The Panel discussion on Aug 5th surpassed my expectations.  It is “a best” source of information on “what happened” and is happening.

I do not wish to steal Jason Lavigne’s excellent work, just help put it into the hands of more people.

The PANELISTS were/are:

  1. Vincent Gircys  @VGircys
  2. Alex Van Herk @alexvanherk, Coutts “leader” and friend of Chris Carbert
  3. Marco Van Huigenbos @marco_huigenbos,  Coutts “leader” and friend of Chris Carbert
  4. Robert Kraychik @rkraychik
  5. Jon Villeneuve @rightblend
  6. Donald Best @DonaldBestCA, retired police officer, corruption and undercover units
  7. Pastor Shawn Hamm @ShawnHamm,  faith leader and friend of Chris Carbert
  8. Katherin Beyak, lawyer for Chris Carbert
  9. T. J. Kennedy @tjkennedyphoto
  10. Shadoe Davis @ShadoeDavis
  11. Pastor Artur Pawlowski @ArturPawlowski1
  12. Bath-Shebia van den Berg, lawyer at Public Order Emergency Commission

You will find more and different recaps at:   Jason Lavigne  @JasonLavigneMP

A Lethbridge Jury found both Tony Olienick and Chris Carbert guilty of mischief.   (And Not Guilty of Conspiracy to murder RCMP Officers.)

@alexvanherk   and    @marco_huigenbos

talk about their guilty mischief verdicts and decisions to not present any defence at trial. Full episode here

Coutts Trial – Final Recap Special August 5th x.com/i/broadcasts/1

= = =  =  = = =

Jason:   You wanted the truth, it’s now time for the whole truth.

Jason Lavigne  @JasonLavigneMP

COUTTS TRIAL COVERAGE Monday, August 5th, 4-8 PM MT (6-10 PM ET)

I will be hosting a packed, anything goes, panel all about the Trial and Pre-Trial of Chris Carbert and Tony Olienick. The Jury Publication Ban is lifted, and there are so many very important details I collected that the public was not allowed to know. Until now.

11:37 AM · Aug 3, 2024      21.4K  Views

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

INSERT, Sandra – –  I copied and pasted in the following from X, prior to the Panel Discussion:

This CBC article claims that Olienick said that he would slit officer’s throats. My understanding it was the undercover officer who claimed he said “they would slit their throats”. Did something come out during the trial about him saying that? Seems like an error from cbc.

Jason Lavigne    You are correct, it was allegations by the Undercover Operatives and never proven or admitted.

  Is it true? Are they free? Not Guilty?)

Not guilty of conspiracy to murder. Not free yet.

Is this going to be a Space on X?

Jason Lavigne   2h      It will be a Live on X.

1h      I’m curious that given NG (Not Guilty) in conspiracy to commit murder what evidence was presented to prove G (Guilty) on weapons for a dangerous purpose?

= = = = = = =  =   Now, from Kraychik:

Robert Kraychik   @rkraychik

Chris Carbert and Anthony Olienick are found not guilty of conspiracy to murder, guilty on the charge of unlawful possession of a firearm for a dangerous purpose, guilty of mischief over $5,000. Olienick was also found guilty of unlawful possession of an explosive device.

8:34 PM · Aug 2, 2024      219.5K Views

 

17h    What compensation do they get for having 2.5 years of their lives that they can never get back stolen?

18h   Thank you for reporting on this and keeping Canadians informed. It is time to ensure this never happens again.

18h    I hope they appeal the 2 guilty verdicts

17h    The charge for Tony was related to his business and shouldn’t have happened.

Regardless, thank God that some justice prevailed.

18h   Replying to @GordMagill

Tony’s explosives charge was opportunistic on the part of the Crown; they were industrial explosives from a gravel quarry found 200km away. There was no intent in the charge, which is why they applied it – Crown knew they could get him on simple possession, and this was used as a

\18h   Thanks Robert. Was hopeful for less, but could be worse. Now how long do we wait for sentencing? Hopeful for time served.

18h   Fantastic news!

7h    Praying for a successful appeal.

18h   Trudeau holds 4 guys, 2 of them for 901 days and counting; for being a danger to society because of ‘conspiring to murder rcmp’; A charge that there are zero convictions of.

17h  What a travesty this whole thing has been. Two and a have years in remand while actual criminals are on the street the same day they are arrested. Can they bring a civil suit against RCMP?

18h  Damn! The EA (the Emergencies Act) fraud WILL BE EXPOSED. Great work boys.

18h  People deserve your immediate apology for leading and flaming lies that not only negatively impacted the Coutts men but Canadians across the country

18h   Are they released yet

18h    Possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose carries with it a maximum sentence of 10 years in jail.

18h    Does this mean that they will not be allowed into the US?

18h    Are they going home

18h    So thankful for those men to be going home.

13h  900 days, or about two and a half years, is right at the 30 month presumptive ceiling for reasonable time to trial established by the Supreme Court in the Jordan decision in 2016. The prosecution did this very deliberately and calculated the timeline well ahead of time.

Are they going to remand them until sentencing?

It’s two for one with time served.

(INSERT, Sandra:  I expect that these and many more questions will be answered in Monday’s Panel Discussions.)

2024-08-01 lecture at Mises Institute by Dr. Robert Malone. Centered around 5th generational warfare and surveillance capitalism.

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Privacy of Personal Information; Charter Right; Surveillance; StatsCan Censuses & Surveys, Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 032024
 

With thanks to Dan who writes:

Excellent lecture given at the Mises Institute by Dr. Robert Malone, Aug 1/2024. The topic is centered around 5th generational warfare and surveillance capitalism.

Mises University is the world’s leading instructional program in the Austrian school of economics. Recordings of the lectures and seminars presented at the Mises Institute, July 28 – August 3, 2024. The Mises Institute promotes Austrian economics, freedom, and peace in the liberal intellectual tradition of Ludwig von Mises through research, publishing, and education.

https://youtu.be/q-cV5WUuyB4

2024-05-24 Defend medical privacy in Nova Scotia and all of Canada. JCCF

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 022024
 

FROM:  JCCF   (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms)

 

 

Defend medical privacy in Nova Scotia and all of Canada
Dear friend of freedom,

Your medical privacy is about to become history if a new law is not challenged and defeated.

Nova Scotia’s House of Assembly recently passed Bill 419, giving the Nova Scotia government power to access patients’ individual medical records.

Among other things, Bill 419 empowers the Nova Scotia government to create and maintain an electronic database populated with the personal medical information of Nova Scotians. This is a dangerous law that we must vigorously challenge and defeat before it spreads to the rest of the country.

When politicians and bureaucrats gain access to private medical information, serious harms result. It sets government on the path to potentially totalitarian control over every dimension of citizens’ lives.

Access to peoples’ medical records could be used by governments to create different medical categories and use them to discriminate between citizens.

Apart from opening the door to restrictions on personal freedoms, there is a valid concern about privacy, simply for privacy’s sake.

It’s not anyone’s business – and certainly not the government’s – to know what medical problems or conditions you might have, or what treatments you have received in the past, or will receive in the future. The same holds true for politicians and government officials: they should not be permitted to access your personal medical information – even if they do not abuse or misuse that information.

That’s why the Justice Centre will be challenging this law in court.

 

Support our court action

 

 

Nova Scotia House of Assembly (Photo credit: Spiroview Inc.)

 

Nova Scotia politicians claim they need to access individual patient records for “planning and management of the health system, resource allocation and creating or maintaining electronic health record programs and services.” This claim is dishonest. Governments can “plan and manage” healthcare systems without accessing individual patient medical records.

Bill 419, now passed into law, opens the door to severe restrictions on personal freedoms.

If a violation of medical privacy were combined with a requirement that citizens use a QR code or other government ID, the state could then exercise direct control over many aspects of our daily lives.

The violation of our medical privacy would result in the loss of our autonomy – the freedom to live our lives as we deem best. Personal autonomy matters. Our vision has always been “a free society where governments uphold human dignity by respecting fundamental rights and freedoms, and where Canadians can realize their potential and fulfil their aspirations”

Will you support our vision for a free Canada?

 

Support our vision for Canada

 

Under this new law, the Nova Scotia government could decide to issue citizens new health ID cards and require that every physician send in the patient health record of each citizen. These new health ID cards would contain the personal health information of each citizen.

With its new electronic database, the government could then (for the sake of “safety”) create new regulations to restrict freedom of movement and activity. For example, in order to keep everyone safe, citizens could be forced to swipe their cards to gain access to certain highways, certain cities, certain neighbourhoods, certain stores, etc.

Nova Scotia’s new law could open the door to barring pregnant women from entering a pub or a restaurant that serves alcohol. Special restrictions could be placed on people who drink alcohol, consume cannabis, eat too much junk food, or fail to get enough exercise. People who have not taken an annual flu shot could be banned from airports, train stations, or even public transit.

With health care costs straining the budgets of every Canadian province, the government could also conceivably use the private medical information of individual patients to proactively offer citizens assisted suicide (usually referred to as “Medical Assistance in Dying” or MAID).

Canadians have already seen and experienced firsthand the dangers of government using private individual medical information to control people.

During the pandemic, personal medical data was used to prevent some individuals from playing team sports, watching their own children play team sports, travelling by plane to visit a dying parent, working out at the gym, eating in restaurants, and watching a movie in a theatre.

One might hope that Nova Scotia’s College of Physicians and Surgeons would step up to the plate to defend medical privacy and the doctor-patient relationship. Sadly, no. After initially opposing Bill 419, the College took a 180-degree turn and actually supported this law.

It is, therefore, up to the Justice Centre to fight this fight.

We are a registered charity. We rely entirely on the generosity of freedom-loving Canadians to fund a team of lawyers across Canada who fight for your rights and freedoms every day.

We are not influenced by politicians. We do not ask for or accept any government funding.

If you want to live in a country that respects medical privacy, where Canadians can confide in their doctors and know that their personal medical information will not be disclosed to anyone, then please help us defend your rights and freedoms by donating to the Justice Centre.

Yours sincerely,

John Carpay, B.A., LL.B.
President
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

 

Donate to the Justice Centre

 

 

 

You can donate online at www.jccf.ca, or by e-transfer sent to etransfer@jccf.ca, or by mailing a cheque to the address below. Your donation will be eligible for an official tax receipt.

Cheques can be mailed to:

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
#253, 7620 Elbow Drive SW
Calgary, Alberta, T2V 1K2

 

 

2024-07-05 Ontario man (Hartman) sues Pfizer & Health Canada for wrongful death of son following COVID vaccination, by Lee Harding, Western Standard. Hartman sent tissue samples to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole. Lawyer Umar Sheikh representing.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Aug 012024
 

Update, Hartman wrongful death charges against Pfizer and Health Canada. By Lee Harding. Western Standard

4 days after the covid shot, 17-year old Sean was rushed to Emergency

  • “(The doctor)  just sent him home with pain reliever for his shoulder,”  No blood tests.
  • 33 days after the shot Sean was dead.

Ontario man sues Pfizer for wrongful death of son following COVID vaccination

Dan Hartman speaks with pictures of his son in the background
Dan Hartman speaks with pictures of his son in the backgroundDerek Sloan / Funding the Fight Rumble channel
A man who lost his teenage son after he took a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is suing the company for wrongful death.

Dan Hartman, of Beeton, Ontario, lost his 17-year-old son, Sean, a couple of years ago, 33 days after receiving his first COVID-19 shot.

In an interview with former Conservative MP Derek Sloan, Hartman claimed to have the first and only lawsuit in North America against Pfizer for wrongful death.

“He was my only son, he was such a good boy, such an angel, the purest soul you would ever meet. He was a beautiful child, all I can do now is keep fighting for him,” Hartman said.

Sean Hartman said hockey was his son’s “love and passion” and it was made necessary to take the shot as a condition of playing hockey. On August 25, 2021, he received a Pfizer vaccine.

“On August 29, he was rushed to emergency with brown circles around his eyes, and vomiting and a rash and a severely sore shoulder. The doctor there failed to do any bloodwork at all he didn’t do a D-dimer test. He didn’t do a troponin test. He just sent him home with pain reliever for his shoulder,” Hartman recalled.

“And 33 days after my son took his first Pfizer shot. He was found dead on the floor beside his bed on the morning of September 27.”

The death was clearly unusual to Dan Hartman, and an autopsy cleared up nothing.

“My son was perfectly healthy, had no underlying conditions. Didn’t didn’t drink a drop of alcohol in his life never had a cigarette. I waited three long months to get autopsy results. And they came back with cause of death ‘unascertained’.”

Hartman sent tissue samples from his son to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole.

“He found a large amount of spike protein in Sean’s adrenal glands. And his blood pressure likely crashed. Your adrenal glands control your blood pressure. And he died in trying to maybe stand up.”

READ MORE
Ontario man whose son died after COVID vaccine denied compensation
Dan Hartman speaks with pictures of his son in the background

Lawyer Umar Sheikh is representing Hartman in a lawsuit against Pfizer and a separate lawsuit against Health Canada.

“I’m trying to get justice for my son, so he can rest in peace, because he cannot rest in peace without justice. In my opinion, my son was murdered. There’s no doubt about it. And I’ve been doing this for more than two years, every single day,” Hartman said.

The lawsuit is expected to cost $500,000, of which Hartman has raised $135,000.

“I want all of Canada and everywhere in the world to get behind this if they can. Because if I beat them that’s going to open the doors for others to win. i We have such good evidence. We have Dr. Peter McCullough coming to Canada as my expert witness. And we also have two other expert witnesses,” he said.

“I just need to get to that courtroom to fight them. It’s the only thing that matters to me in my life now. Every day is just total pain from morning till night.”

Hartman’s court date is July 22, his birthday.

Sloan, who is a lawyer, believes Hartman has a good case.

“With such a tragic and immediate reaction, Dan has a chance to win this lawsuit,” Sloan said in an email to supporters.

– – – – – – – – – – –

 

 Older Entries  Newer Entries