Sandra Finley

Nov 092024
 

Original Text followed by a tribute.

 

Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.

Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain or bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.

Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself. Especially do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment, it is as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.

Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.

 

Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here.

And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be. And whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.

– – – – – – – – – – –

Andrea Beiza,  Student,  Credit to Max Ehrmann for the poem

Although there are many well-known poems like “The Raven” by Edgar Allan Poe, “Still I Rise” by Maya Angelou and “We Wear the Mask” by Paul Laurence Dunbar, there is a hidden gem that you may not have discovered yet: “Desiderata.”

“Desiderata,” a poem by Max Ehrmann from 1927, remained unknown until the cultural shifts of the 1960s and 1970s drove it into the spotlight. The overall message of the poem delivers wisdom and guidance, offering directions on how to navigate life with grace, integrity and inner peace.

The advice the poem presents is why Ms. Nguyen, an AVID and English teacher, decided to introduce it to her senior students for AVID.

“I taught it to my senior class probably roughly seven or eight years ago. I wanted them to have something meaningful to read and something that they could relate to. The students were ready to graduate, and I needed them to leave with a true sense of their inner compass, so they enjoyed it, and I’ve used it ever since,” Nguyen said.

“Desiderata” encourages readers to embrace their path, strive for inner tranquility during life’s challenges and treat others with kindness and understanding which is why Ms. Nguyen believed this was a great piece of literature for her graduating students every year.

Senior Karla Godinez shares the impact of this poem on her life.

“I enjoyed this poem because it was significant. I was feeling overwhelmed during this lesson, and this poem made me feel better about my future. It changed my perspective since it made me look forward to life. I am a very negative person, to be honest. But this poem made me think of myself as a person, humanity, and life as a whole,” Godinez said.

Godinez found the poem deeply meaningful, especially during an overwhelming moment. It gave her a hand of hope to see a brighter future and changed her negative outlook. Her experience shows how powerful the poem’s message can bring hope and a fresh perspective.

Ms. Nguyen’s approach to teaching “Desiderata” went beyond just a simple analysis. She aimed to make the poem deeply personal for her students hence why she made them create their own poems.

“In addition to reading the poem and doing the critical analysis and the appreciation for the literary devices and metaphors and the typical reading encounters, I really want them to personalize and internalize the poem. So we do our own version of the Desiderata so they can understand the things we desire, which is what Desiderata means, are the things we give to ourselves and are also born with already,” Nguyen said.

An anonymous senior shared his thoughts on making his own “Desiderata” poem.

“Along with just reading the poem, Ms. Nguyen made us do our own version, which I greatly enjoyed. I’ve written stuff like poems before, but this one was different because of how meaningful Desiderata was to me. I don’t think I’ll ever forget the poem and my version of it. I will keep it in mind when I’m going through hardships. I thank Ms. Nguyen for that,” he said.

Through “Desiderata,” Ms. Nguyen taught more than just English; she shared a powerful lesson about resilience and hope.

“I think everyone should read this poem. It doesn’t matter if you’re a preteen, a teen, or someone like me, who’s read it a million times, each season of our lives we always need affirmation. If you read a line and say ‘Wow, I need to be reminded of this,’ then it did its purpose which is to keep us seated in our philosophy and to keep us in our compass,” Nguyen said.

Nov 062024
 

Federal Judge Robert J. Shelby said the PREP Act’s liability shield does not extend to breach-of-contract claims. He said the basis of Brianne Dressen’s claim “is a broken promise, not a countermeasure.”

AstraZeneca vaccine bottle and lady justice

A federal court ruled Monday that a lawsuit filed by a woman injured by AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine during a U.S. clinical trial can continue. The court rejected the drugmaker’s claim that a federal liability shield protects it from breach-of-contract claims.

Brianne Dressen sued AstraZeneca in May, alleging she was injured and became disabled by the company’s vaccine in 2020 when she participated in the company’s clinical trial.

According to the complaint, AstraZeneca’s consent form for trial participants promised enrolees medical treatment in the event of illness or injury suffered during the study.

In its motion to dismiss, filed in June, AstraZeneca said that under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) of 2005 — which grants manufacturers of emergency countermeasures such as COVID-19 vaccines immunity from legal liability — Dressen could not sue the vaccine maker for her injuries.

But in his Nov. 4 ruling, Chief Judge Robert J. Shelby of the U.S. District Court in Utah said the PREP Act’s liability shield does not extend to breach-of-contract claims. He said the basis of Dressen’s claim “is a broken promise, not a countermeasure.”

The ruling stated:

“PREP Act immunity requires a causal link between the claim and a tangible medical countermeasure, and breach of contract claims arise from one party’s failure to perform a legal obligation without regard to any countermeasure. The PREP Act’s statutory scheme and purpose support this construction.”

Shelby’s ruling could result in more lawsuits challenging the PREP Act, according to Ray Flores, senior outside counsel for Children’s Health Defense.

Flores, an expert on the PREP Act, told The Defender:

“The court sent an unmistakable signal by issuing this ruling six days after the motion was argued. It is historic since this is the first time a federal court determined that a COVID-19 vaccine injury may be compensable in any way.

“It is refreshing to see that the PREP Act’s unprecedented invincibility now at least has one limit — breach of contract. Battery, fraud and false advertising must be the next exceptions.”

Hands on top of each other

The NewCommunity Forum Browse topics, ask questions, find answers

Join the conversation      ‘PREP Act is public enemy No. 1’

According to Dressen’s lawsuit, AstraZeneca’s consent form for trial participants stated, “If you become ill or are injured while you are in this research study, you must tell your study doctor straight away. The study doctor will provide medical treatment or refer you for treatment.”

Dressen, who since co-founded React19, a nonprofit that seeks to help people injured by COVID-19 vaccines, alleged her vaccine-related injuries and disability resulted in prohibitive medical costs. One medication alone costs $432,000 a year.

AstraZeneca offered her only $1,243.30 in compensation, prompting her to file the breach-of-contract claim.

“For AstraZeneca to have relied on the PREP Act in its motion to dismiss explains why its $1,243.30 settlement offer was so insultingly low,” Flores said. “PREP appears to be AstraZeneca’s main justification for its failure to live up to the terms of a written contract. This is just one more example of why the PREP Act is public enemy No. 1.”

Astra Zeneca claimed its contract with trial participants did not waive its PREP Act immunity and that Dressen’s lawsuit was not a breach-of-contract claim but a product liability claim — which would then preclude Dressen’s claim under the Utah Product Liability Act’s two-year statute of limitations.

The court rejected those claims, finding there was “express contractual privity between Dressen and AstraZeneca” and citing two cases involving buyers of defective COVID-19 tests who successfully sued the manufacturers based on a breach-of-contract claim.

Dressen also argued that AstraZeneca waived its immunity “by clearly and unmistakably promising to pay the cost of research injuries.” The court agreed.

This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.

Please Donate Today

“AstraZeneca made a contractual promise to her that happened to involve the effects of a covered countermeasure. Accordingly, Dressen’s claim for loss was not ‘caused’ by a covered countermeasure,” the ruling stated. “The PREP Act has a broad scope, none of which involve any breach of express contract.”

According to the ruling, shielding drug manufacturers from breach-of-contract claims was not the intent or purpose of the PREP Act.

“The PREP Act drafters could not have intended to allow pharmaceutical companies to make illusory promises to clinical trial participants because doing so would erode public trust and undermine the ability to recruit willing participants, which in turn would erode and undermine pandemic preparedness,” the ruling said.

The court also rejected AstraZeneca’s claim that Dressen’s lawsuit was a product liability claim, not a breach-of-contract claim.

“The court is unpersuaded. The plain text of the Utah Product Liability Act does not apply because Dressen does not allege AstraZeneca’s vaccine was defective,” the ruling said.

Dressen, who was 39 when she was vaccinated, was previously a preschool teacher. She is now unable to work due to her injuries.

Flores predicted that Dressen’s lawsuit would ultimately succeed.

“When this case was filed, I went on record stating that my money was on the plaintiff. After this ruling, I predict that Ms. Dressen will take an eight-figure jury award to the bank,” Flores said.

Suggest A Correction
Nov 022024
 

Note:   “Police on Guard for Thee”  – the name speaks for itself – is a support group that arose during the Trucker / Freedom Convoys.

The support, gratitude, and admiration for Cullen McDonald, as shown by the influx of congratulatory messages is rousing.

Links to “X”  (Twitter)  below take you to the Police on Guard account.   It is there that you see the influx of support for Cullen.

Also notable:   the voices of support for the integrity of the Judge who delivered the final verdict.  And for the other “good guys” in the system of justice.   Many thanks to journalist Jen Hodgson for making this information available.

Cullen McDonald

All charges have been dropped against Cullen McDonald, who faced three criminal charges for peacefully protesting COVID-19 mandates in Ontario — setting a precedent for many other Canadians who face similar charges.

McDonald in 2022 was charged with two counts of common nuisance for peacefully protesting in Niagara, ON and one count of the same crime in nearby St. Catharines. The Niagara judge acquitted him, but the St. Catharines judge upheld the original ruling.

“In all of my years of practicing law, I have never seen a case that has the potential to cause more damage to rights and freedoms in Canada, than the case of His Majesty the King vs McDonald,” said criminal lawyer Saaron Gebresellassi, per Police on Guard For Thee.

Justice Richard Blouin, the judge who acquitted McDonald for the Niagara charges, said he didn’t want to set a “dangerous precedent” for persecuting him for protesting against the infringement on his civil liberties.

“Elevating a violation of provincial health orders to a criminal offense would set a dangerous precedent, as it would allow every infraction of public health measures to be treated as a criminal offense rather than just a provincial violation,” said Blouin.

However, Justice Joseph De Filippis in St. Catharines ruled McDonald is guilty — leaving him with a criminal record and $4000 fine.

Cullen appealed his guilty verdict. Crown Prosecutor Michael Lucifora simultaneously appealed the Niagara acquittals and said the fine wasn’t enough, and pursued one year of jail time.

Yet, this week, the appeal court dismissed both the Crown’s appeals and overturned the original guilty verdict, completely exonerating McDonald.

Nov 022024
 

 

Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed
Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed   Western Standard Canva

The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta on Wednesday released its decision to allow a class action on behalf of local businesses from the COVID-19 era to proceed.

King’s Bench Justice Colin C.J. Feasby ruled Alberta business owners adversely affected by COVID-19 restrictions and closures imposed through Deena Hinshaw, the chief medical officer of health (CMOH) at the time, had grounds to pursue the lawsuit, and certified the class action in Ingram v Alberta, 2024.

Lawyer Jeffrey Rath of Rath & Company, the law firm representing the businesses, earlier told the Western Standard the class action would expose where Albertan officials’ “priorities were” during the pandemic — “making sure the bureaucrats are okay, not making sure Albertans are okay,”

Because the COVID-19 mandate orders were ultra vires, meaning not under the Public Health Act and therefore unlawful, “the government has huge liability,” said Rath, adding that if officials had issued them under the act, “that would have been perfectly legal.”

READ MORE
EXCLUSIVE: Alberta businesses launch class action for millions in losses due to pandemic public health orders
Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed

The court in its certification of the class action, led by Rebecca Ingram and Christopher Scott, “certified multiple claims, including negligence, bad faith and misfeasance in public office,” states a Freedom4Canada press release.

“The court allowed affected businesses to claim compensation for harm and losses incurred due to the illegal CMOH orders including punitive damages,” it said.

Lawyers further argue Alberta’s cabinet acted “negligently or in bad faith by issuing orders through the CMOH” while MLAs “chose to camouflage their actions as public health orders under the PHA so they could blame the CMOH rather than accept political responsibility.”

READ MORE
Without Papers Pizza hits AHS with $3.6-million lawsuit for illegally closing restaurant during COVID
Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed

Feasby in his decision acknowledged the plaintiffs “plead essentially that cabinet hid behind the CMOH thereby avoiding democratic accountability.”

“That, in my view, is a collateral purpose that is plausibly bad faith,” he wrote, stating the court’s express permission for punitive damages claims “to hold Alberta accountable and deter future misconduct” and agreeing this is a reasonable common issue.

“Specifically Justice Feasby acknowledged that punitive damages are intended to punish wrongful conduct rather than compensate for losses, and can sometimes be assessed on a class-wide basis,” states the news release.

“Unlike general damages, which require individual assessments, punitive damages can be addressed as a common issue when the misconduct affects a broad group,” explained lawyers.

“All individuals who owned, in whole or in part, a business or businesses in Alberta that was subject to full or partial closure, or operational restrictions, mandated by the CMOH Orders between March 17, 2020, and the date of certification. For clarity, “owned” does not include ownership as a shareholder in a corporation or as a member of a cooperative,” reads the judge’s decision.

READ MORE
HISTORIC WIN: Ontario man wins appeal for charges related to protesting COVID mandates
Court rules Alberta business COVID class action has grounds to proceed

Following the judge’s announcement, Rath said, “This is a huge day for Alberta businesses that were illegally harmed by Jason Kenny and Deena Hinshaw.”

“The court found that the action can proceed against the government of Alberta on a number of grounds including misfeasance in public office allowing the plaintiffs to seek punitive damages against the Alberta government for wrongdoing,” said Rath.

Nov 022024
 

Most of us are aware of the “Pfizer Documents“.   This interview follows the publication of  “The Pfizer Papers”.  Wolf  is clear-eyed and clear-headed, as always.   With thanks to Michael Nevradakis and the CHD.

– – – – – –

Naomi Wolf, author of “The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity,” joined this week’s “Defender In-Depth” to discuss the documents and what they reveal, including hidden deaths and the “appalling” irreversible harm to human reproduction.

defender in depth and naomi wolf

Watch ‘The Defender In-Depth’ here:

Listen to the podcast on Spotify.

Hundreds of thousands of pages of internal Pfizer documents related to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine revealed deaths, serious adverse events and irreversible harm to reproductive health, according to Naomi Wolf, CEO of Daily Clout.

Wolf, author of “The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity,” joined this week’s “Defender In-Depth” to discuss the documents and what they reveal.

She said the 450,000 pages of Pfizer documents showed that the company and public health agencies “certainly knew that the vaccine didn’t work,” prompting the federal government and Pfizer to try to conceal them.

“The FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] asked the court to keep these documents hidden for 75 years,” Wolf said. “They want us all to be dead before they see the light of day.”

A federal court ordered the release of the documents, following a successful lawsuit by Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency.

Media also helped conceal the documents and the vaccine’s dangers from the public. “None of this could have been accomplished … if the legacy media had done its job,” Wolf said.

 

‘They knew they were killing and injuring people at massive scale’

Wolf said that without access to the resources of a large media outlet, she and her team at Daily Clout faced an uphill battle in unpacking and analyzing the documents.

“These documents were so voluminous and so technical in language that they were very difficult for any journalist to understand and explain,” Wolf said. The solution was to recruit volunteer scientists to help review the documents.

“We put out a call for experts to volunteer … and amazingly, 3,250 doctors and scientists responded,” Wolf said.

Wolf said the documents reveal that Pfizer and public health agencies manipulated the clinical trial data to delay reporting deaths of trial participants so they could meet safety targets and claim the vaccine was “safe and effective.”

“The only way they were able to make that claim was to hide the bodies of eight vaccinated dead people who had died with COVID and to illegally delay reporting those deaths to the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention],” Wolf said.

Concealing the deaths was just one sign that Pfizer “knew very early on” — within the first three months of the vaccines’ rollout — that the shots were dangerous, Wolf said.

Wolf said:

“They knew that there were 1,223 deaths within three months and side effects. There were 43,000 people with serious adverse events and over 130,000 serious adverse events in total in just these three months. They knew that they were killing and injuring people at massive scale.”

Vaccine injuries were often “catastrophic” and included “horrific blood clots, lung clots … pericarditis, myocarditis, heart damage of all kinds, neurological events at massive scale, epilepsies, dementias, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, turbo cancers … liver damage, kidney damage” and other conditions, according to Wolf.

Wolf said the documents show the two most commonly reported adverse events are muscle pain and joint pain. “Many people feel bad now and don’t know why, and their doctors don’t know why,” she said. “Pfizer knows why.”

Pfizer knew the vaccines bio-distribute the lipid nanoparticles and the spike protein and the polyethylene glycol, a petroleum byproduct, “to every part of your body, every organ in your body,” Wolf said.

“So many people are arthritic now or need knee replacements, shoulder replacements, healthy young people having joint issues. Pfizer knew that the injections are inflammatory and joint pain is an inflammatory condition,” Wolf added.

‘Most appalling eight pages you can imagine’

For Wolf, the most egregious revelations from the Pfizer documents have to do with the vaccines’ impact on human reproduction.

“The centerpiece of the Pfizer papers … has to do with destroying human reproduction in many ways,” Wolf said. “Lipid nanoparticles are designed to traverse every membrane in the human body. It’s not a bug, but a feature” of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Wolf cited a chart in the documents showing that 15,000 women experienced bleeding every day, 10,000 women were having two periods per month and 7,500 women were not having periods at all, “meaning no children, not fertile.”

Pregnant women also experienced side effects. Pfizer lost the records of 234 pregnant women who participated in the clinical trials. But for the 36 pregnant women whose records survived, “over 80% of them lost their babies,” Wolf said.

Wolf said the data showed that 62% of adverse events were in women, with 16% of those being reproductive disorders, compared to 0.2% for men. The documents also contained “disturbing sections” recommending that vaccinated men avoid intercourse with women of childbearing age, due to a possible risk to women or the fetus.

Wolf said an eight-page Pfizer document, the “Pregnancy and Lactation Report,” indicated severe injuries and deaths among babies.

“It’s the most appalling eight pages you can imagine,” Wolf said. “There are two babies in that document who died in utero, and Pfizer concluded the deaths were due to maternal exposure to the vaccine. They also have a chart in there that shows babies getting very sick from nursing vaccinated mothers.”

 

This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.

Please Donate Today

 

‘People woke up in time’

Wolf said that legacy media ignored these revelations because of funding they receive from Big Pharma and organizations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation that offer media “vast sums” to “overcome vaccine hesitancy.”

“These documents do not overcome vaccine hesitancy — they create vaccine hesitancy,” Wolf said. But because “media took the money” and are “complicit in this massive crime,” they are now ignoring revelations like the Pfizer documents because that would open them up to lawsuits, Wolf said.

Yet, public awareness is growing. Wolf said:

“They tried to sterilize us. They tried to disable us, they tried to kill us. … and they didn’t succeed. The great project they had of culling the population or culling the West hasn’t succeeded yet. People woke up in time.”

Wolf said that while her book contains “chilling” revelations, it’s also “lifesaving” because “it really points you in the direction … of how to heal because you’ll understand better what happened to you if you’re vaccinated.”

She said the attacks are not over. “The globalists are not going to stop. But when we all resist, even if we think we’re not very powerful, it turns out that we are very powerful, and they cannot overcome us when enough of us say no.”

 

‘The Defender In-Depth’ airs on CHD.TV every other Wednesday at 10 a.m. ET/7 a.m. PT.

Nov 012024
 

PREVIOUS WAS:   For Your Selection OCTOBER 23

– – – – – – – – – – –

For Your Selection NOVEMBER 1, 2024
  1. 2024-10-31 Scientific and Medical Network: Review of “The Indoctrinated Brain”, written by David Lorimer

A.  COVID

B.   SURVEILLANCE AND FREEDOM

C.  OTHER

– – – – – – – – – –

A.  COVID

2.   2024-10-29 Idaho Health Board First in U.S. to Defy CDC and FDA by Removing COVID Vaccines From Clinics. Suzanne Burdick, CHD.

Update, Nov 02, Dan:  Well, on a positive note, I see CTV ran the story about Idaho stopping the covid vaxx. Still some spin, but at least they didn’t ignore the story like I thought they would. Maybe they smell a change in the wind.

3.   2024-10-27 Covid: The Most Devastating Report So Far, the Congress of the USA Report on HHS Covid Propaganda. Brownstone Institute.

4.   2024-10-22 Bill Gates to Stand Trial in Netherlands in COVID Vaccine Injury Lawsuit. Michael Nevradakis, CHD

5.   2024-10-04 Vaxed-3

 

B.   SURVEILLANCE AND FREEDOM

 

6.   2024-10-30 Digital credentials for Canadians?  When and by whom?

7.   2024-10-27 Privacy of Personal Info / Surveillance: Reject Real ID, Don’t Use QR Codes. CHD Panel with Catherine Austin-Fitts

8.  2024-10-31 Biometrics, Digital ID Make ‘Fully Digital Travel Experience’ a Reality: International Air Transport Association (IATA)+ More. CHD

9.   2024-10-29 NIH (U.S.) EHR (Electronic Health Records). Spending $2.2 Million to ‘Nudge’ Elderly to Get More Vaccines. Baletti, CHD.

10.   2024-10-31 Alberta’s Bill of Rights. 4 different analyses by John CARPAY, JCCF.

 

 

C.  OTHER

11.   2024-10-30 No GM Wheat Event, Saskatoon, SK   Tues Nov 5th

12.   2024-10-19 National Citizens Inquiry (NCI), Vancouver Testimony

13.   2024-10-26 RFK’s Make America HEALTHY Again.

14.   2024-10-29 Liberal capitalism only exists in the textbooks, by Toby Rogers (an American)

15.   1991-07-05 A Speech by the Prince of Wales (now King Charles III) on the 150th Anniversary . . . to the College of Psychiatrists

Nov 012024
 

With many thanks to Dan for sending this.

A GREAT MENTAL RESET?
Review of “The Indoctrinated Brain”, written by David Lorimer
Oct 31, 2024

This review of The Indoctrinated Brain, originally published in Paradigm Explorer #145 by David Lorimer of the Scientific and Medical Network, is shared here with kind permission for your reading.

Michael Nehls is a physician and molecular geneticist specialising in immunology who has received the Hanse Prize for Molecular Psychiatry for his pioneering findings on Alzheimer’s disease development, prevention and therapy – highly relevant to the thesis of his very important and eye-opening book on the neurobiology of propaganda. Work on mind control goes back to the post-war period, and the book is informed by the dystopian novels of Aldous Huxley George Orwell, extensively quoted here (see also my review of Michelle Stiles on the history of propaganda in No. 143). The author stresses that all the facts he presents are based on publicly available documents and scientific studies, and he leaves readers to decide for themselves about the validity of his hypothesis, having set out his case.

He applies neuroscience to the behavioural modification campaign undertaken during the Covid crisis by showing how the deliberate deployment of consciousness-altering narratives of fear and anxiety represents an attack on the hippocampus as the nexus of autobiographical memory and individuality. This has made us ‘deindividualised, more suggestible, more forgetful, more compliant, and less able to engage in critical thinking and creative reasoning.’ (p. ix in foreword by Naomi Wolf) He argues that it is this fear combined with the adverse effects of the spike protein, especially in the gene injection (aka vaccine, p. 88), that changes and damages the brain.

Nehls elaborates on the larger political and economic context within which the war on personal freedom has been and is being conducted in order profitably to maintain power and control over humanity and engineer a transition towards a centralised world government technocracy through the UN – rule by experts. By keeping us in a permanent state of emergency, we become more amenable to the ‘solutions’ being advanced by elite groups such as the World Economic Forum intent on the imposing their new totalitarian operating system of coexistence – the Great Reset – on humanity by 2030. One of their questionable underlying assumptions is that there are technological answers to social problems. The Covid pandemic response was pre-planned at Event 201 in October 2019, and was rolled out as envisaged (you can look this up on the Internet). This included manipulative narrative management and censorship of so-called misinformation and disinformation, as well as an exclusive reliance on an experimental vaccination as the cure, which in turn entailed the suppression of clinically viable early treatments including administration of Vitamin D – Nehls shows on the basis of scientific studies (p. 6) how adequate levels of Vitamin D provide strong immunological protection. As a medical doctor, it is his task to save lives and strengthen the immune system – hence the importance of preventive measures.

The seven chapters rigorously set out the arguments in great detail, enabling readers to understand the reprogramming of the human brain and the deliberate tactics used in this respect. The purpose of indoctrination is ‘to implant an ideological narrative into people’s brains – a new belief that allows no discussion and no contradiction. The goal is obedient, unthinking conformity. The means to this end is controlled selection of information, intensive propaganda, and psychological manipulation, up to coercive measures and threats of punishment… Indoctrination is to be understood as a vicious attack on our humanity, on our personality, and ultimately on the most precious thing of all: freedom of thought. Resisting indoctrination is a lifelong endeavour. It is a matter of preserving one’s freedom of thought and search for meaning.’ (p. xv)

Nehls explains the key role of the hippocampus as a neurobiological correlate of chronic exhaustion in society and its role in autobiographical long-term memory by means of the continuing production of what he calls index neurons (pp. 46 ff). Recent studies show that declines in ongoing hippocampal neurogenesis may be linked to compromised cognitive-emotional resilience. If this process is disturbed, stress hormones rise excessively in unfamiliar situations, which may lead to ‘ego depletion,’ anxiety and depression, which Nehls has found may be a precursor to Alzheimer’s disease (see also his book The Exhausted Brain). A sense of purpose turns out to be an important preventive measure, along with exercise, nutrition, a supportive social life, and proper sleep. Due to a global deficiency in Vitamin D levels, we have come to think that a decline in hippocampal volume is normal, when it should in fact be maintained throughout life (p. 65). In fact, such a decline is ‘ultimately a representation of the normality of a mentally exhausted society.’ This is a hugely important lifestyle point in a society based on constant acceleration and correspondingly rising stressors. Specifically, Covid-19 measures served as a means of hippocampal destruction, reaching even into the foetus in pregnant women, who were never part of clinical trials. All of this is still vehemently denied.

It is impossible to summarise the detailed arguments in relation to the many levels of evidence presented, which is why I strongly recommended reading the book itself, which will certainly have a transformative effect on your understanding of specific issues as well as the big picture. Chapter 6 presents Nehl’s analysis of the endgame and the potential role of AI control, which leads him to ask: ‘How can we preserve the value of the human being in the wake of the AI automation of almost every aspect of life? What is the value of human being anyway? Is it only to be found in his productivity? What does it really mean to be human? (p. 178)

The closing chapter – Daring to be more Human (Kind) – proposes some guidelines, while inviting readers to assess for themselves the overall argument. Nehls thinks that the overall process of usurping global power will go according to plan unless we mount a peaceful resistance to this process. He points out that no one can escape the basic principle: ‘he who is silent is consenting; he who does not resist is accepting what will happen to him.’ (p. 183) He quotes Jean-Claude Juncker, former president of the European Commission to the effect that the technocrats decide on a policy and wait to see if there is any resistance. If not, ‘we continue step-by-step until there is no turning back.’ This is where we are.

Nehls argues that humans are fundamentally good, but that ‘negative news stories [tapping into our negativity bias] feed into the notion that man is evil’ and must therefore be controlled through surveillance and strict rules. However, as he points out, ‘What we need is cooperation not confrontation, intelligent collaboration instead of destructive opposition.’ (p. 192) What we have seen is the weaponisation of empathy and selflessness for evil to bring about conformity (‘protect your grandmother’). The problem is that empathy [for the in-group] and xenophobia go hand in hand, and need to be replaced by rational compassion. In going forward, ‘we must believe in the possibility of success, and above all in ourselves, in the belief that the co-operative power and social capacity of human nature will defeat the technocratic mechanisms of the oppression, both spiritual and material.’ (p. 207) Ultimately, he points out, ‘we have no choice but to resist being forced into a certain worldview, and time is of the essence.’ We need ‘a genuine evolution of human coexistence,’ understanding that human nature is basically good, and a society of the future should be based on this premise.’ (p. 208) So the book is both a deeply informative warning and a manual for human resistance.

https://michaelnehls.substack.com/p/a-great-mental-reset

Oct 312024
 
October 31, 2024 Censorship/Surveillance

Big Brother NewsWatch

Biometrics, Digital ID Make ‘Fully Digital Travel Experience’ a Reality: International Air Transport Association (IATA)+ More

The Defender’s Big Brother NewsWatch brings you the latest headlines related to governments’ abuse of power, including attacks on democracy, civil liberties and use of mass surveillance. The views expressed in the excerpts from other news sources do not necessarily reflect the views of The Defender.

The Defender’s Big Brother NewsWatch brings you the latest headlines.

Biometrics News reported:

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is claiming a win following a biometrics proof-of-concept (PoC) which, according to a release, involved “two passengers using different digital wallets and travel credentials on a round-trip between Hong Kong and Tokyo.”

The two-day PoC involved partnerships with Cathay Pacific, Hong Kong International Airport, Narita International Airport, Branchspace, Facephi, NEC, Neoke, Northern Block and SICPA. Airport elements were conducted in a live environment, building on a 2023 PoC carried out in a test environment.

IATA and partners then ran the standard airport objective for biometrics firms: seamless progression through airport processes and checkpoints — including bag drop, security, immigration and boarding — using biometric authentication, eliminating the need to show travel documents.

“A seamless fully digital travel experience powered by digital identity and biometrics has moved from theory to proven reality,” says Nick Careen, senior vice president for operations, safety, and security for IATA. “The challenge now is to make this more efficient travel experience available to all travelers. There is good reason for optimism. With One ID standards already in place,” he says, “the industry could be ready for this in the very near future.”

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Projects Are Foundering in Five-Eye Nations. What Gives?

ZeroHedge reported:

As we warned in May 2022, a financial revolution is quietly sweeping the world (or at least trying to) that has the potential to reconfigure the very nature of money, making it programmable, far more surveillable and centrally controlled. To quote Washington DC-based blogger and analyst NS Lyons, “if not deliberately and carefully constrained in advance by law,… CBDCs have the potential to become even more than a technocratic central planner’s dream. They could represent the single greatest expansion of totalitarian power in history.”

At the time of writing that post, around 90 countries and currency unions were in the process of exploring a CBDC, according to the Atlantic Council’s CBDC tracker. Today, just two and a half years later, that number has increased to 134, representing 98% of global GDP. Around 66 of those countries are in the advanced stage of exploration — development, pilot, or launch.

But they do not include the U.S. In fact, the U.S. is not just trailing most countries on CBDC development; it could soon become the first country to explicitly ban the central bank from issuing a CBDC, to the undisguised horror of certain think tanks.

In May, the US House of Representatives passed HR 5403, also known as the “CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act.” The bill, first introduced in September 2023 and sponsored by U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, proposes amendments to the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the U.S. Federal Reserve from issuing CBDCs. It also seeks to protect the right to financial privacy and prevent the U.S. government from “weaponizing their financial system against their own citizens.”

Legal Scholars Developing Guidance for Biometrics Legislation

Biometrics News reported

Two law institutes, one from Europe and one from the U.S., launched a new collaborative project focusing on the ethical and legal implications of collecting and using biometric data.

Initiated by the Philadelphia-based American Law Institute and the Vienna-headquartered European Law Institute, the main task of the project is defining a legal framework aimed at regulators working in different democratic countries.

The move comes at a crucial time for regulating artificial intelligence and biometric data on both side of the Atlantic. This year, the European Union finally launched its artificial intelligence, or AI Act, while U.S. agencies have been developing AI guidelines and debating uses such as facial recognition. The project, titled Principles for the Governance of Biometrics, has four initial goals.

 

Deaths Linked to Chatbots Show We Must Urgently Revisit What Counts as ‘High-Risk’ AI

The Conversation reported:

Last week, the tragic news broke that U.S. teenager Sewell Seltzer III took his own life after forming a deep emotional attachment to an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot on the Character.AI website.

As his relationship with the companion AI became increasingly intense, the 14-year-old began withdrawing from family and friends, and was getting in trouble at school.

In a lawsuit filed against Character.AI by the boy’s mother, chat transcripts show intimate and often highly sexual conversations between Sewell and the chatbot Dany, modelled on the Game of Thrones character Danaerys Targaryen. They discussed crime and suicide, and the chatbot used phrases such as “that’s not a reason not to go through with it”.

In a statement to CNN, Character.AI has stated they “take the safety of our users very seriously” and have introduced “numerous new safety measures over the past six months”. In a separate statement on the company’s website, they outline additional safety measures for users under the age of 18. (In their current terms of service, the age restriction is 16 for European Union citizens and 13 elsewhere in the world.)

However, these tragedies starkly illustrate the dangers of rapidly developing and widely available AI systems anyone can converse and interact with. We urgently need regulation to protect people from potentially dangerous, irresponsibly designed AI systems.

Largest U.S. Healthcare Data Breach Exposes Medical Records of 100 Million Customers

Mashable reported:

A staggering new update has confirmed that February’s UnitedHealth data breach has impacted over 100 million Americans, now marking it as the largest healthcare data breach in U.S. history. But the fallout extends beyond individual patients — it touches entire families, elevating the scope and scale of this unprecedented attack.

The revised figure was disclosed on Oct. 24 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights, which updated its data breach portal to reflect the full breadth of the breach. While the attack occurred in February, this latest report is the first official accounting of the impact widespread.

As reported by Forbes, the breach didn’t just expose data; it crippled critical services to hospitals, clinics, and medical practices nationwide, causing widespread operational chaos across the healthcare network.

UnitedHealth reportedly paid the ransomware hacker group $22 million in a desperate bid to recover the stolen data and halt further exposure. But in a bold move, the hackers reneged on the deal, pocketing the payout while keeping the data — leaving tens of millions of Americans’ information dangling on the dark web.

Oct 312024
 

The reporting indicates to me that many Canadian Members-of-Legislatures finally realize that the game is changing:  THEY aren’t the ones making the decisions.   They’re just the Fall Guys.

Maybe they don’t want to be the Fall Guy?   Maybe we can work with them?   Whatever – – I think  it’s an opportune time to increase our one-to-one communications with our Elected Representatives.   They are more likely to listen when they’re vulnerable AND supported.

= = = = = = = = =

Tamara Ugolini, Rebel News, writes:

Another so-called “conspiracy theory” could be on the way to becoming reality.

Federal regulators are gearing up to expand their ability to track and monitor Canadians with the push by Shared Services Canada of a new “digital credential” scheme — otherwise known as a digital ID.

Blackrock’s Reporter broke the news that unelected regulators are working to advance “digital credentials” without Parliamentary approval or debate and successive calls by MPs warning the move would be risky and expensive.

Will this be a necessary step to keep Canadians “safe” or is it a solution for a problem that doesn’t even exist?

Here’s the latest on what we know:

Digital IDs have been a fevered dream of multinational organizations like the WEF and governments around the world for years as world “leaders” progressively push us toward their technocratic utopia.

While they continually sell the idea based on its convenience, in reality, the adoption of digital IDs only opens the door for governments to assert more power over us.

Canadians have already gotten a glimpse of what a digital ID could entail following the vaccine passport and ArriveCan experiments. Both were used to segregate society and limit mobility based on people’s health status, access to technology, and willingness to participate in a Big Pharma profit-driven mass injection campaign.

Will history repeat itself? And if it does, will you comply?

If you want to stop the implementation of digital IDs and the ushering in of a bio-security social credit system, please sign our petition at StopDigitalID.com.

Yours truly,

Tamara Ugolini

P.S. Governments around the world want to impose digital IDs on the population, which grants access to all our personal information, including biometric and tracking data. They must be stopped. Say no to digital ID by signing our petition at StopDigitalID.com.

Oct 312024
 

John Carpay is President of the JCCF.  His columns are published on the

  • JCCF Website; also selectively, for example,  by
  • Western Standard News and
  • Epoch Times.

During October, John has written columns related to Alberta’s (Premier Danielle Smith’s) efforts to improve Rights legislation.    His  Commentary is helpful (#1 – #4 below).

Western Standard News adds depth – –  the origin of the Alberta Bill of Rights :  Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said an updated Alberta Bill of Rights will be coming out in the fall. Columnist Michael Wagner says the original one has already proved its worth

See   https://www.westernstandard.news/opinion/wagner-smith-right-a-bill-of-rights-is-an-instrument-of-freedom/58337?utm_source=website&utm_medium=related-stories

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

CARPAY’S WORK;

1.  Canadians Need Legislation to Protect Their Rights

Photo credit: mbruxelle

In September, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced that the right to make one’s own choices about receiving vaccinations should be added to the Alberta Bill of Rights, stating: “No Albertan should ever be subjected or pressured into accepting a medical treatment without their full consent.”

Some argue that new laws to protect the right to bodily autonomy are redundant because the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms already protects citizens from government abuse.

In theory, the Charter protects bodily autonomy, including the right to make medical choices, under the right to “life, liberty and security of the person.” In theory, the Charter protects the right to decide for oneself, without any coercion or pressure, whether to get injected with a vaccine. In theory, governments must justify “demonstrably” with cogent and persuasive evidence that any health order that violates a Charter right or freedom is reasonable, rational, truly necessary, and bringing about more good than harm. In theory, judges should base their rulings only on the evidence placed before them in court by the parties in a dispute, to the exclusion of media reports. In theory, when judges state that party “A” has presented better and more persuasive evidence than party “B,” judges will explain why and how they came to that conclusion. In theory, when a judge upholds lockdowns or vaccine passports as justified violations of Charter rights and freedoms, the judge will explain why she or he believes that the government’s evidence is better and more persuasive. In theory, Canadians don’t need laws to be changed because the Charter already protects citizens from being forced, pressured, or manipulated into getting injected with a vaccine.

Using the words “in theory” seven times in the paragraph above is necessary, unfortunately. In reality, when Canadians have challenged governments in court over violating Charter rights and freedoms, some judges have upheld lockdowns and mandatory vaccination policies without providing clear reasons—or any reasons—as to why the judge preferred the government’s evidence over the evidence presented by the citizens. In some cases, judges have made assertions in their rulings that are not supported by any evidence at all; these assertions appear to be based only on what the media have stated repeatedly.

In Gateway Bible Baptist Church v. Manitoba, the judge described Covid as an “unprecedented” public health threat and “the worst global pandemic in over a century.” He did so without referencing any evidence to support his claim that Covid was more deadly than the1957–58 Asian Flu and the 1968–69 Hong Kong Flu, each of which claimed between one and four million lives, according to the World Health Organization. It appears that the judge’s assertion about Covid was based only on the repeated claims made by fearmongering, government-funded media.

In Alberta Health Services v. Artur Pawlowski, the judge ordered an outspoken pastor to proclaim the government’s narrative about Covid, lockdowns, and vaccines whenever the pastor addressed these topics in public. The judge ordered the pastor to state, among other things, that “Vaccinations have been shown statistically to save lives and to reduce the severity of COVID-19 symptoms.” When the judge issued this totalitarian order in 2021, the mRNA vaccine was still in clinical trials, and no long-term safety data was available about the impact of this new technology on people.

In O.M.S. v. E.J.S., the judge was so convinced of the truth of the government-and-media narrative about Covid and vaccines that he declared the vaccine to be “safe and effective” for everyone. In September 2021, he ordered a 12-year-old girl to get injected with the Covid vaccine, against her will and against the will of her mother. The judge declared that he could conclude without the necessity of any specific proof that Covid poses a “serious and significant” health risk to children. This amounts to declaring: “The media and politicians have been saying every day for the past 18 months that COVID seriously threatens adults and children. This claim must be true, because I have heard it repeated hundreds of times by politicians and journalists, often in combination with frightening pictures of sick, dying, and dead people. Repeated media assertions combined with disturbing visual images are a good substitute for evidence in court.”

If the judge had bothered to look at death statistics from any Canadian province, or any country in the world, he would have understood that children were as likely to die of Covid as they were to die of lightning strikes.

The judge in O.M.S. v. E.J.S. went on to take “judicial notice” of the “fact” that the Covid vaccine was “safe and effective” for use in both adults and children, because Health Canada and the Saskatchewan Health Authority had said so. The judge actually asserted in his ruling that no reasonable person would dispute the accuracy of a claim made by a government health authority!

Perhaps he has never heard of all the people damaged by thalidomide, a drug deemed safe and effective by health authorities in the 1950s. Doctors advised pregnant women to take thalidomide, resulting in miscarriages as well as babies dying at birth or shortly after. The babies who were not killed by thalidomide suffered life-long deformities and permanent damage to their limbs, brains, and other organs. All of this happened under the watchful eye of health authorities in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Germany, and other countries. But when the Saskatchewan Health Authority declared a vaccine that was still in clinical trials to be “safe and effective” for children, this judge happily embraced the government’s claim as gospel truth.

In Hillier v. Ontario, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice upheld the government’s total ban on all outdoor protests as a justified violation of the Charter freedom of citizens to assemble peacefully. The judge ruled in favour of the government without considering seriously the very real harms that lockdowns inflicted on millions of people. The judge completely ignored a lengthy and comprehensive report by medical anthropologist Dr. Kevin Bardosh. His expert report relied on 150 peer-reviewed Canadian studies representing hundreds of Canadian scholars, showing the magnitude of lockdown harms in Canada.

In Ontario v. Trinity Bible Chapel, the judge upheld the government’s violations of Charter freedoms while declaring proudly that she would not engage in a serious scientific analysis of the relevant issues: “My role is not that of an armchair epidemiologist. I am neither equipped nor inclined to resolve scientific debates and controversy surrounding Covid-19.” The judge further declared that “it is not my task to mediate or resolve conflicting views about Covid-19.” Wrong. Resolving conflicting views is a judge’s job description. The Charter requires that governments justify “demonstrably” with persuasive evidence any health order that violates one or more of our Charter freedoms. This judge lowered the bar for government, and merely asked “Was it open to Ontario to act as it did?”

In theory, the Charter protects Canadians from being forced, pressured or manipulated into getting injected with a vaccine. In light of recent court rulings that are more media-based than evidence-based, the sad reality is that legislation must be changed expressly to protect citizens from government abuse.

John Carpay – The Epoch Times

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

The Alberta Legislature Building is located in Edmonton, Alberta, and is the meeting place of the Legislative Assembly and the Executive Council.

Introduced in the Legislature on October 28, Bill 24 improves the Alberta Bill of Rights by recognizing that “the position of the family in a society of free people and free institutions” should be honoured and respected.

Another positive addition is its assertion that human rights and fundamental freedoms are of foundational importance “including during times of emergency.” Bill 24 would amend the Alberta Bill of Rights to recognize expressly the individual’s right not to be coerced into receiving medical care, treatment or procedure (including a vaccine). Bill 24 strengthens property rights to include “the right not to be subject to a taking of property except to the extent authorized by law and where just compensation is provided.”

Bill 24 adds “the right to acquire, keep and use firearms.” However, this new right is rather vague, and possibly meaningless, because its exercise must be “in accordance with the law.” If a new provincial law unfairly or unreasonably restricts the use of firearms, would this new addition to the Alberta Bill of Rights be helpful to a firearms owner?

To stop judges from continuing to ignore the Alberta Bill of Rights (as some judges have done), a new provision declares that “any law of Alberta that is inconsistent with the provisions” of the Alberta Bill of Rights is “to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.”

Sadly, the rights and freedoms recognized by the Alberta Bill of Rights are severely undermined by the addition of a new clause that mirrors Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Bill 24 expressly permits government to violate rights and freedoms by claiming that a law or government policy is a “reasonable limit” that can be “demonstrably justified” in a free and democratic Alberta.

These same words were used by judges across Canada to uphold lockdowns and mandatory vaccination policies under Section 1 of the Charter. In cases across Canada, governments admitted in court that they were violating Charter rights and freedoms, and judges happily accepted these violations as “reasonable limits” without bothering to take a hard look at the harms that lockdowns were inflicting on people. Why would judges interpret the Alberta Bill of Rights differently than the Charter, when the exact same language about “reasonable limits” would be added by Bill 24?

In Alberta Health Services v. Artur Pawlowski, the judge ordered an outspoken pastor to proclaim the government’s narrative about Covid lockdowns and vaccines whenever the pastor addressed these topics in public. The judge ordered the pastor to state, among other things, that “Vaccinations have been shown statistically to save lives and to reduce the severity of Covid symptoms.”

When the judge issued this totalitarian order in October 2021, the mRNA vaccine was still in clinical trials, and no long-term safety data was available about the impact of this new technology on people.

In O.M.S. v. E.J.S., Harper-appointed judge Michael Megaw ordered a 12-year-old girl to get injected with the Covid vaccine, against her will and against the will of her mother. In September 2021, he declared that Covid posed a “serious and significant” health risk to children, and that he needed no specific proof to support his conclusion.

If he had bothered to look at death statistics from Canada or other countries, he would have understood that children were as likely to die of Covid as they were to die of lightning strikes. The judge went on to take “judicial notice” of the “fact” that the Covid vaccine was “safe and effective” for use in both adults and children, because Health Canada and the Saskatchewan Health Authority had said so. This judge asserted that no reasonable person would dispute the accuracy of a claim made by a government health authority!

What about thalidomide, a drug deemed safe and effective by health authorities in the 1950s that killed and damaged so many babies across the globe?

In Hillier v. Ontario, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice upheld the government’s total ban on all outdoor protests as a justified violation of the Charter freedom of citizens to assemble peacefully. The judge applied Charter section 1 and ruled in favour of the government while completely ignoring a lengthy and comprehensive expert report by medical anthropologist Dr. Kevin Bardosh, that outlined the magnitude of lockdown harms in Canada.

These judgments in the Pawlowski, O.M.S. and Hillier cases are representative of how judges abused Section 1 of the Charter to place their stamp of approval on lockdowns and mandatory vaccination policies.

In theory, Bill 24 amends the Alberta Bill of Rights so as to protect Albertans from being forced, pressured or manipulated into getting injected with a vaccine, along with other new protections. However, in light of recent court rulings that used Section 1 of the Charter to violate human rights, the new protections that Bill 24 seeks to create may be illusory.

John Carpay – Western Standard

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

3.   Steps forward, steps backward, in Bill 24 changes to the Alberta Bill of Rights

The Justice Centre applauds various proposed amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights in Bill 24, introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta on October 28, 2024, especially those which:

  • Recognize the important “position of the family in a society of free people and free institutions”
  • Recognize that freedoms are important “including during times of emergency”
  • Ensure that Courts will actually apply the Alberta Bill of Rights to the laws and actions of the Alberta government
  • Clarify that the Alberta Bill of Rights shall apply to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta and to the Government of Alberta
  • Recognize “the right of the individual with capacity not to be subjected to, or coerced into receiving, a vaccine without the consent of that individual”
  • Increase protections for property rights

The Justice Centre is disappointed, however, that the proposed amendments subject the rights and freedoms of Alberta to “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic Alberta.” This language, because it mirrors section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, affords the Government of Alberta and government entities in Alberta too much latitude to violate rights and freedoms, given the broad deference Courts have recently given government under that language to violate Charter rights and freedoms. In theory, this language could result in citizens’ rights and freedoms being protected from abuse by government, but in practice judges have interpreted these words to make it easy for governments to violate fundamental Charter freedoms.

The Justice Centre is concerned about proposed amendments that appear to offer weak protections against forced medical care and treatment outside of a context involving vaccines. If Bill 24 passes in its current form, Albertans could be coerced into receiving medical care, treatments, or procedures if it is believed that the “individual is likely to cause substantial harm to that individual or to others” by not receiving it.

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

CARPAY: Between the rock of the status quo and the hard place of Bill 24

No easy solution to protecting individual rights in Alberta
The status quo is bad, not because of deficiencies in the Alberta Bill of Rights, but because some judges really do not cherish the free society, writes lawyer John Carpay, in a further consideration of the Government of Alberta's Bill 24.
The status quo is bad, not because of deficiencies in the Alberta Bill of Rights, but because some judges really do not cherish the free society, writes lawyer John Carpay, in a further consideration of the Government of Alberta’s Bill 24.WS file photo
John Carpay

John Carpay    

Premier Danielle Smith and her United Conservative Party are between a rock and hard place, when it comes to protecting individual rights and freedoms in Alberta.

The Alberta Bill of Rights is provincial legislation that recognizes the individual’s right to liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law; the freedoms of religion, speech, assembly, association, and the press; and the right of parents to make informed decisions respecting the education of their children.

It states that “every law of Alberta” shall be so construed and applied as not to “abrogate, abridge or infringe” any of the rights or freedoms that are recognized and declared by the Alberta Bill of Rights. “Law of Alberta” means an Act of the Legislature as well as any order, rule or regulation.

Unlike the Charter, the Alberta Bill of Rights has no provision to authorize judges to strike down laws as being incompatible with the Alberta Bill of Rights. Rather, the Alberta Bill of Rights requires that all laws be construed and applied as protecting individual rights. The Alberta Bill of Rights does not have an equivalent to Section 1 of the Charter, the section which allows judges to condone laws and policies that violate our Charter freedoms.

It states that “every law of Alberta” shall be so construed and applied as not to “abrogate, abridge or infringe” any of the rights or freedoms that are recognized and declared by the Alberta Bill of Rights. “Law of Alberta” means an Act of the Legislature as well as any order, rule or regulation.