Sandra Finley

2023-11-15 Doctors warn British Columbians about the province’s tyrannical health care act. I think You will want to see this. Drea Humphrey, Rebel News. (Bill 36)

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 162023
 

I recently posted about the cases of  7 Ontario doctors:

2023-02-19 . . . ONTARIO Doctors who Dissented from Covid-19 Doctrines Fight for their Professional Lives. by Jason Unrau. C2C Journal.

Below we have news from BRITISH COLUMBIA.  Bless Drea Humphrey!

The focus on BILL 36 (AWARENESS of the Bill) brought doctors out in significant numbers.  They are not afraid to speak up.  Bless them, too!

– – – – – – – – – –

Critics of the Health Professions and Occupations Act believe that it will lead to the politicization of healthcare and grant the Minister of Health sweeping power over how health practitioners can provide care for their patients.

In today’s report, I interview doctors and other healthcare professionals who are sounding the alarm about British Columbia’s new Health Professions and Occupations Act (HPOA).

The Act, formerly called Bill 36, was passed in November of last year, despite members of the legislature never getting the chance to formally debate more than half of the bill’s over 600 sections.

 

 

Critics of the Health Professions and Occupations Act believe that it will lead to the politicization of healthcare and grant the Minister of Health sweeping power over how health practitioners can provide care for their patients.

Watch the full report to hear concerns about the Act from some of BC’s finest in healthcare, including Ukrainian-born Dr. Marina Sapozhnikov MD, who says the HPOA is reminiscent of her time under the rule of the Soviet Union.

 

 

Rebel News traveled by ferry to meet with these health professionals in Victoria after thousands of postcards from citizens calling for the Act to be repealed were submitted to the legislative assembly by the Conservative Party of BC.

If you appreciate that we are able to be your eyes and ears by bringing you important reports like this, please consider donating what you can here at www.RebelFieldReports.com to help us cover our expenses.

British Columbia Canada Health & Medical Health Canada Rebel Field Reports News Analysis

2023-11-15 Vaccine confidence wanes as public trust in health authorities dwindles. By Tamara Ugolini, Rebel News.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 152023
 

Public trust in vaccine programs is declining, a direct reflection of the erosion of confidence caused by COVID-19-related public health measures. The loss of credibility is empowering people to take control of their health, breaking free from the pharmaceutical industry’s customer-generating chains.

Last week, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report that showed vaccine exemption rates for childhood vaccinations are at an all-time high.

The data highlights national coverage for select vaccines and exemptions from school vaccine requirements in kindergarteners for the 2022/2023 school year.

It showed that national coverage for state-required vaccines among kindergartners dropped from 95% to around 93%, with a 0.4 percentage point increase in the exemption rate to 3.0% and in 10 states, exemption rates surpassed 5%.

The CDC claims that a failure to meet that 95% threshold — obtained through the mass vaccination of children against vaccine-preventable diseases like polio, diphtheria, measles, mumps and pertussis — will “increase the risk for outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.”

The year-over-year drop of one percentage point in vaccine coverage began in 2020/2021 — the same time that COVID-19 hysteria started.

The CDC claims that “National MMR coverage among kindergarten students remained below the Healthy People 2030 target of 95% for the third consecutive year.”

While there does not appear to be any scientifically valid evidence for the establishment of that arbitrary percentage, there is ample information on how to maintain that coverage. A big part of it is summary evidence showing that requiring vaccines for school entry increases vaccination uptake.

It’s just a little casual coercion.

In addition, there are “evidence-based resources” available that detail the most effective ways to nudge people into compliance with vaccination. There is no information available to justify that 95% uptake percentage, other than the fact that it’s guidance issued by the World Health Organization (WHO).

 

 

The WHO recommends 95% coverage to prevent measles outbreaks, even though their website also lacks scientific evidence to support that threshold. They do, however, mention the Immunization Agenda 2030 three times, with an emphasis that vaccination uptake is at an all-time low globally.

So, what about Canada?

The most recent Canadian data comes from 2021, called the childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (cNICS). It’s structured differently than the CDC’s, but the demographics for seven year olds, the demographic mostly closely related to the CDC’s kindergarten exemption group, has also seen a drop in vaccine uptake.

The Public Health Agency of Canada also sets a 95% vaccine uptake goal, which hasn’t been achieved since the cNICS began in 2013 for any pathogen other than rubella. And since 2019, almost all vaccine uptake except rubella and varicella (chickenpox) has declined.

The trend seems to continue across various jurisdictions. In Ontario, the Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge District Health said that “roughly 6,300 of the health unit region’s 20,000 students scheduled for immunization still have incomplete records.” That represents 31.5% of students.

The Middlesex London Health Unit in Ontario saw vaccine uptake cut in half! As reported in January of this year, the health unit said that “in the 2018-19 school year, 98 percent of Grade 2 students were vaccinated against measles. This year, 51 percent were immunized.”

That’s a massive drop, and could be why the Government of Canada put out two different video campaigns on childhood vaccines, like this one, urging parents to “trust the facts.”

Public Health’s mismanagement in responding to COVID-19 has significantly marred their reputation.

From devastating lockdowns and detrimental school closures to inconsistent messaging on masking and vaccine efficacy, there’s been a continued disregard for individual choice and autonomy. The suppression of early treatment options has heightened the public’s awareness of compromised medical research and the purported “experts” that everyone was supposed to blindly trust.

Health authorities enforcing a “one size fits all” approach have silenced dissent, eroded public trust and have ultimately led people to seek health empowerment outside the pharmaceutical complex.

With public health increasingly aligning with political science rather than following evidence-based best practices, and becoming increasingly captured by pharmaceutical interests, a growing number of people are seeking liberation from the grip of Big Pharma.

2023-11-14 Parallel: Canada and the U.S., can’t trust the Government’s reporting of Covid Vaccine Deaths and other Adverse Events. a. analysis: VAERS manipulation of data, covid shots. b. Two VAERS Systems — The Public Can Access Only One of Them. Reports with thanks to CHD.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 142023
 

In Canada:   https://www.rebelnews.com/_government_documents_expose_underreported_covid_19_vaccine_fatalities

In the USA:

INSERT by Sandra:   The BMJ is a weekly peer-reviewed medical journal, published by BMJ Group, which in turn is wholly-owned by the British Medical Association. The BMJ has editorial freedom from the BMA. It is one of the world’s oldest general medical journals. Wikipedia

 

‘The Defender In-Depth’: VAERS Intentionally Undercounting, Obscuring Vaccine Injury Data, Expert Says

– – – – – – –  – —

An investigation by The BMJ into the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, found multiple deficiencies in the system, including the revelation that the government runs two systems — one for the public, and a private back-end system that contains all of the corrections and updates, including deaths that occurred after an initial injury.

vaers broken vaccine safety feature

Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender’s Top News of the Day. It’s free.

When Dr. Robert Sullivan collapsed on his treadmill three weeks after his second COVID-19 vaccine in early 2021, he fell into a “nightmare” ordeal that he said exposed glaring deficiencies in the nation’s vaccine safety monitoring system.

Diagnosed with sudden onset pulmonary hypertension, the healthy and fit 49-year-old anesthesiologist from Maryland attempted to file a report through the government-run Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

But like others interviewed in a recent investigation by The BMJ, Sullivan hit barrier after barrier when trying to submit and update his report.

Almost three years later, still grappling with debilitating symptoms, Sullivan’s experience highlights the systemic problems with the U.S. adverse events monitoring system run jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

From doctors unable to file reports to disappearing data, limits on transparency and lack of resources to follow up on concerning vaccine reactions, experts warn VAERS is failing to detect critical safety signals.

According to one of those experts — VAERS researcher Albert Benavides, whose experience includes HMO claims auditing, data analytics and revenue cycle management — VAERS’ failure isn’t accidental.

“It is not broken,” Benavides wrote in his Substack coverage of The BMJ investigation. “VAERS runs cover for the big pharma cabal.”

‘They even delete legitimate reports’

Like others interviewed by The BMJ, Sullivan experienced limited follow-up after submitting his VAERS report. He received only a temporary report number months after his initial submission.

A physician named “Helen” (pseudonym) told The BMJ that fewer than 20% of concerning reports get follow-up, including many deaths she reported.

In consultation with Benavides, an audit by React19 found that 1 in 3 COVID-19 vaccine adverse events reports in VAERS were either not posted publicly or were deleted. React19 is a nonprofit that collects stories of people injured by the mRNA vaccines.

According to The BMJ, of those queried by React19, “22% had never been given a permanent VAERS ID number and 12% had disappeared from the system entirely.”

Benavides, who publishes the VAERSAware dashboards documenting many of the problems with VAERS, said there is even deeper dysfunction in the VAERS system — from inventing symptoms to deleting reports.

“VAERS does not publish all legitimate reports received,” Benavides told The Defender. “They throttle publication of reports. They even delete legitimate reports.”

For a system dependent on voluntary engagement, these restrictive policies keep critical data hidden, according to Benavides.

In 2007, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) contracted with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care (HPHC) to review the VAERS system. In 2010, HPHC filed its r report, which determined that 1 in 39 people experienced vaccine injuries and that only around 1% of vaccine-related injuries or deaths are ever reported to VAERS.

The CDC, which operates under HHS, scuttled the study, refused to take calls from the researchers and declined to upgrade the VAERS system when a new, much more effective system was developed.

‘Blind spots are self-created’

VAERS “collects reports of symptoms, diagnoses, hospital admissions, and deaths after vaccination for the purpose of capturing post-market safety signals,” according to The BMJ.

But the limited transparency of VAERS data presents barriers to proper analysis, according to The BMJ’s investigation and researchers like Benavides.

The public — including doctors and other report submitters — can access only incomplete initial reports, not updates with vital details.

This means outcomes like death are often excluded if the initial report was for an injury and a subsequent death report was filed.

“I made the false assumption that my conversation [with VAERS] would result in an adjustment to the publicly reported case,” Patrick Whelan, M.D., Ph.D., told The BMJ.

Whelan, a rheumatologist and researcher at the University of California Los Angeles, in 2022 filed a report of a cardiac arrest in a 7-year-old male patient after COVID-19 vaccination.

“I assumed that, since it was a catastrophic event, the safety committee would want to hear about it right away,” Whelan said. But nobody called him or requested an update after his submission.

“There was no mechanism for [updating] it,” Whelan told The BMJ. “The only option I had was to make a new VAERS report.” Without updates, the VAERS data showed that the boy was still hospitalized.

Whelan is one the authors of a recent critique of the Cochrane Review that concluded the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were not dangerous.

The problem with VAERS is not limited to a lack of adequate follow-up but to the incomplete and often inaccurate information found there.

“VAERS in effect allows typos, truncated lot #’s, UNK [unknown] ages, UNK vax dates, UNK death dates, etc. to pass through into publication,” Benavides said.

Benavides said specific data — including ethnicity, hospital names, attending physicians, submitter’s relationship to the patient, patient and submitter addresses, telephone numbers and emails — collected by VAERS are not published,

“Any blind spots are self-created, in my opinion,” he said.

Agencies maintain two separate VAERS databases — public gets to see only one

“There’s two parts to VAERS, the front end and back end,” stated Narayan Nair, division director for the FDA’s Division of Pharmacovigilance at a December 2022 meeting with advocates, according to The BMJ. “Anything from medical records by law can’t be posted on the public-facing system,” he said.

The BMJ investigation discovered that the FDA and CDC maintain two separate VAERS databases, one available to the public that contains only initial reports, and a private back-end system containing all of the updates and corrections.

“Anything derived from medical records by law” cannot be posted on the public-facing system, Nair told the advocates, according to The BMJ.

In an apparent contradiction to this claim, The BMJ noted the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), which collects post-marketing information on drug reactions, posts its updates publicly.

Sullivan, who met Nair years before COVID-19 and considers him a friend, told The Defender that if this “very bright, kind and caring person” could not fix VAERS, “I don’t think it’s fixable.”

Withholding outcome data like deaths obscures critical safety signals, experts contend.

James Gill, a medical examiner, reported the death of a 15-year-old patient after vaccination, but the case was dismissed by the CDC despite autopsy evidence, according to the BMJ investigation.

Physician “Helen” told The BMJ that after filing reports on her medical patients, including six who had died, she received only a single request for medical records on the death and two for hospital-admitted patients.

The standard operating procedure for COVID-19 vaccine reports in VAERS, according to The BMJ, is for reports to be processed quickly and for “serious reports” to receive special review by CDC staff.

However, while some other countries have acknowledged the probable connection between the mRNA vaccines and death, the CDC, while claiming to have reviewed nearly 20,000 death reports, has yet to acknowledge a single death linked to the COVID-19 vaccines, The BMJ said.

Benavides provided The Defender examples of VAERS “deleting legitimate reports,” not just duplicates or false claims.

“VAERS even deleted dead Pfizer Trial patients,” he said, claiming that this report, for example, was not a “duplicate” and did not appear to be fake.

Benavides said:

“There are currently about 50 deaths that are not counted as deaths because the correct box is not checked off.

“There are thousands of reports and about 100 deaths in ‘UNKNOWN VAX TYPE’ in VAERS. Read the narrative to see these are clearly C19 jab-related deaths.

“There are over a thousand cardiac arrests where they are not marked as dead, and I question if they actually survived because there is no mention of ROSC [return of spontaneous circulation].”

“Why couldn’t VAERS populate the ages of these dead kids before publication?” Benavides said, pointing to this report on his website.

Physicians report only FDA-recognized adverse events

Ralph Edwards, former director of the Uppsala Monitoring Centre and until recently editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine, told The BMJ the regulators may be relying too heavily on past epidemiological data, especially for new types of adverse events. “If something hasn’t been heard of before, it tends to be ignored,” he said.

Without guidance to report potential risks, doctors also face barriers. “Physicians are only willing to talk about FDA-recognized vaccine adverse events,” stated physician “Helen” in a 2021 meeting between the FDA and physicians and advocates, according to The BMJ.

Svetlana Blitshteyn, a neurologist and researcher at the University at Buffalo, New York, told The BMJ if physicians are not educated to look for a specific condition, they’re unlikely to test for it or know how to treat it.

Sullivan told The Defender he believes his experience of developing pulmonary hypertension after taking the mRNA vaccine is one such safety signal the CDC and FDA are overlooking — a condition he believes many athletes have unknowingly developed.

Sullivan co-authored a paper of his and one other similar case of post-vaccine pulmonary hypertension. According to the paper:

“Pulmonary hypertension is a serious disease characterized by damage to lung vasculature and restricted blood flow through narrowed arteries from the right to left heart. The onset of symptoms is typically insidious, progressive and incurable, leading to right heart failure and premature death.”

“Athletes are canaries in the coal mine,” Sullivan told The Defender, speaking of the unusual numbers of athlete deaths since the rollout of the vaccine. Sullivan thinks that those with superior physical conditioning, like him, stand a better chance of survival with early detection.

However, he said, “Athletes will get echocardiography, and it will be essentially normal. The only way to tell for sure is to do a right-heart catheterization” that can identify the anomaly.

Sullivan believes the lives of many athletes could still be saved if the reporting system recognized and investigated the signal — and said he would be happy to join a project dedicated to this goal.

He also told The Defender he believes many of the sudden deaths reported in the 25- to 44-year-old age group are a result of this hidden condition.

 

scales of justice

Your support helps fund this work, and CHD’s related advocacy, education and scientific research.
Donate Now

 

‘The buck stops with the CDC for reforms’

Critics point to choices by the CDC as compounding VAERS’ passive design and understaffing issues.

Despite over 1.7 million reports since the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, staffing was not boosted accordingly, according to statements the CDC made to The BMJ.

A Freedom of Information Act request by The BMJ revealed Pfizer has nearly 1,000 more full-time employees working on vaccine surveillance than the CDC. Records showed in 2021, Pfizer on-boarded 600 additional full-time employees to handle the volume of adverse reports and planned to hire 200 more.

Physician “Helen” in The BMJ article called for an end to the “negative feedback loop” whereby the FDA fails to list adverse reactions because passive surveillance systems like the FDA’s don’t display them, while at the same time, because of that lack of disclosure, “physicians are blinded to the adverse reactions in their patients, and thus aren’t reporting them.”

“The buck stops with the CDC for reforms needed to open up data,” Benavides told The Defender, adding several suggestions that could immediately improve VAERS:

“Revert back to pre-January 2011 when VAERS did append initial reports with follow-up data, including death. Take off the arbitrary 30-minute time limit to file a report before getting kicked off. Make the process easier to submit follow-up data.”

When asked why the incompetence of VAERS had been allowed to continue for so long, Sullivan told The Defender, “Because of the lack of product liability” for the vaccines “and the surge to defend economic interests.”

Sullivan said he’d like to see the following changes to the system:

  • Pharmaceutical advertising banned.
  • Pharmaceutical company revenues devoted to advertising instead be spent on R&D.
  • The tax money collected on pharma profits be directly sent to victim injury funds.

Yale cardiologist takes on study of COVID vaccine injuries

Benavides said he spoke with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) Monday and is also in discussion with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to address the concerns with VAERS, including the under-publishing of reports.

“That’s a long overdue prospect and it would be incredible to actually get some analysis by that committee,” he said.

Another bright spot comes from news reported in The BMJ’s investigation that Dr. Harlan Krumholz, a cardiologist and researcher at Yale University, has been recruiting members of React19 to study their vaccine injuries.

“We are working hard to understand the experience, clinical course, and potential mechanisms of the ailments reported by those who have had severe symptoms arise soon after the vaccination,” Krumholz told The BMJ.

Sullivan told The Defender that medical science is “just beginning to catalog the damage to the heart” from the vaccines but that “in order to treat something, you have to diagnose it” — and that, because of the shortcomings with VAERS, “we have yet to scratch the surface of that.”

Sullivan, now almost three years into his ordeal, is outliving his initial prognosis.

“I have a grim diagnosis hanging over me, but I’m optimistic because I’m still here,” he said. “I had something bad happen to me, but I’ve met so many amazing, wonderful people along the way who are just interested in truth.”

“I’m going to live the best and most productive life I can with the time I have left,” Sullivan said, helping others who “have this cloud hanging over their future.”

2023-11-29 B.C.: Bonnie Henry named as defendant in class-action lawsuit over her role in COVID-19 vaccine mandates

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 142023
 

RELATED:

1.   2023-11-29 B.C.: Bonnie Henry named as defendant in class-action lawsuit over her role in COVID-19 vaccine mandate           which is this posting.

2.   2023-12-04 Pastor challenges Dr. Bonnie Henry over illegal discrimination between faith groups. From the JCCF.

(2024-04-29:  there are no further updates to report at this time about the Pastor Koopman case.)

3.   2021-09-14 Vaccines: From Okanagan Health Professionals, B.C. Canada: Open Letter to Dr. Bonnie Henry, Adrian Dix, and Premier John Horgan

This is a pretty powerful statement from the Okanagan Health Professionals, made in 2021.

4.   2023-12-06 Bill 36 (B.C.) is the Health Professions & Occupations Act. First class tyranny. But we can stop it, by pitching in to help  CSASPP  the Canadian Society for Science & Ethics in Medicine.  Just spread the word.

5.    2024-04-29      Status of court case. BC, versus Bonnie Henry, by  CSASPP, the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy.

 

2023-11-29 B.C.      Bonnie Henry named as defendant in class-action lawsuit over her role in COVID-19 vaccine mandates

NOTE:  James Baldwin is the plaintiff in this class action, on behalf of  public sector employees.  Umar Sheikh from Victoria is the lawyer for the case.   It’s confusing because there is another case that sounds the same – – #5 in the above list.  I do not think that the two class action cases have been amalgamated, but I could be wrong.

UPDATE, Nov 15, 2024:  The Baldwin class action has since merged with a separate class action claim by United Health Care Workers of BC. The two parties will present arguments over five days of hearings beginning April 7, 2025.

With thanks to Kelowna Now.  By  Iain Burns  

A group representing unionized public service workers has announced a class-action lawsuit against the BC government over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Representative plaintiff Jason Baldwin, who was fired by the Ministry of Finance due to the mandate, launched the suit today on behalf of affected BC Public Service workers.

As well as the provincial government, the suit lists Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry as a defendant.

The suit demands general damages for misfeasance in public office, aggravated damages and punitive damages.

It has been backed by the non-profit BCPS Employees for Freedom Society (BCPSEF), which describes itself as a “diverse group of public servants who stand together for medical privacy and bodily autonomy.”

<who> Photo credit: NowMedia/Colin Smith

Photo credit: NowMedia/Colin Smith

Discussing the suit today, BCPSEF said the Province and Dr. Henry introduced a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for employees in November 2021 that “was contrary to public service employees’ Charter rights.”

That mandate violated the “medical privacy and bodily autonomy of 38,000 BC public servants with its coercive and unjustifiable proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate,” the group added.

BCPSEF said the requirement for workers to be vaccinated led to “untold suffering and harm to public servants and public services.”

The suit claims Dr. Henry committed misfeasance because she had “no basis in fact to justify the information, data and advice she provided and upon which the Province relied to develop its employee vaccination policy.”

It also accuses her of “wilfully or recklessly ignor[ing] known potential risks of adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccination in providing advice to the Province.”

The lawsuit further claims that employees’ rights to freedom of association were violated by the Province and that “forced disclosure of private medical information violated common law and statutory privacy rights.”

Baldwin has retained the services of Umar Sheikh from Sheikh Law in Victoria.

The notice of civil claim can be read here.

The court must now determine if the suit meets the requirements for a class action.

If that determination is made, it will be certified as a class-action suit and can proceed.

Last month, a separate suit, also listing Dr. Henry and the Province as defendants, was filed by two plaintiffs representing fired healthcare workers.

Health professionals in the province are still required to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in order to work, a policy BC United leader Kevin Falcon said is part of a “crusade” by the NDP government.

= = = = = =  = =  = = =

 

In addition, co-plaintiff Jedediah Ferguson, who worked at Cumberland Regional Hospital laundry since June 2015, also received a leave of absence before Interior Health fired her.

According to court documents filed on October 13, the plaintiffs tabled the action “on behalf of members of the class consisting of all unionized healthcare workers in British Columbia who have been subject to the COVID-19 vaccination status information and preventative measures order.”

It asserts the Henry undermined their contractual employment agreements when she issued the public health order on October 14, 2021.

The plaintiffs claim she “acted with reckless indifference or willful blindness” by continuing to enforce the order.

 

 

According to the order, “vaccination is safe, very effective, and the single most important preventive measure for health professionals […] to protect patients, residents and clients, and the health and personal care workforce, from […] COVID-19.”

The suit counters that claim, suggesting the COVID vaccine monographs are ‘misleading,’ while referencing the risk of sustaining an adverse side-effect from the jab, including blood clots. The plaintiffs seek damages for the alleged contract breach, “misfeasance” in public office, and the suit’s certification.

The province had 21 days to respond from the action’s filing, with no response reported as of writing.

 

 

2023-11-12 the WHO blames criticism (of the WHO) on online “misinformation”; from Reclaim the Net.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 132023
 
Reclaim the Net comes from London, England.   You may want to sign on to receive their feed directly.

I first posted some of their work in 2022-02.   They do a very good job of reporting on issues around our access to information.
    The WHO PANDEMIC TREATY is a serious matter.    Scroll down – – Reclaim the Net also reports on the Canadian Dr Mark Trozzi case.
BLAMES “CONSPIRACY THEORIES”

 

WHO Director General Complains About Online “Conspiracy Theories” About WHO Pandemic Treaty

 

Given the fervor of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’ crusade against “disinformation,” if one didn’t know any better, one could hardly guess that he is at the helm of UN’s health agency, the World Health Organization (WHO), rather than some “ministry of truth.”

Then again, given his own, and WHO’s role in the disastrously mishandled pandemic – when those who were to blame at national and international level discovered “misinformation” as a way to discredit any criticism – this is not so surprising.

Now Tedros writes, “We find ourselves in a time where fake news, lies, conspiracy theories, misinformation and disinformation are rampant.” The reason this time is the UN’s push to get countries around the world to agree to “the pandemic accord.”

 

 

The document is designed to put in place the tools to handle “the next pandemic,” but is far from limited to health issues.

Opponents have been warning that the accord also aims to introduce surveillance tools, effectively facilitate censorship, and undermine a country’s sovereignty in the decision-making processes during a health crisis by transferring a number of powers to the UN.

This last serious concern seems to rub Tedros particularly the wrong way.
There are many more aspects to losing national sovereignty than overt ones such as direct imposition of vaccination or lockdowns, but in his post Tedros chose to focus on that, to then blast critics as making claims that are “completely unfounded, untrue, nonsense and have no basis in reality.”

The WHO director-general doth protest too much, some might conclude.

Such language doesn’t just come out of nowhere; it is usually a signal that not everything is going smoothly behind the scenes, and here Tedros seems to be trying to not only persuade countries about “fake news, lies, conspiracy theories…” around this issue, but also to get them to launch propaganda campaigns in favor of the accord, ASAP.

Tedros calls this, “actively countering false narratives.”

“It is important for them to communicate with their own citizens, assuring them that this agreement explicitly protects their country’s sovereignty. There should be no room for doubt or confusion in this matter,” he wrote on X.
A post – or a whole study – explaining how exactly the proposed treaty “explicitly protects” national sovereignty would be even better as a way to leave “no room for doubt or confusion.”

That’s lacking, but efforts to promote WHO’s narratives are only increasing. Thus, Spark Street Advisors is lobbying by proposing “soft (reputational) incentives such as technical and material resources to help countries (with compliance).

Most international agreements leave it to nations to “self-report” on implementation, but here the recommendation is for the accord to set up “an independent monitoring committee, tasked with producing regular assessments of state parties’ compliance with the pandemic agreement and the timeliness, completeness and accuracy of self-reporting.”

Not sovereignty-undermining, this. Not at all. /s

 

 

Reclaim The Net accepts no advertising and is funded entirely by the community. If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture, and restoring privacy and civil liberties, you can make a one-time donation here.

 

Donate

 

 

OBAMA VS THE FIRST AMENDMENT

 

 

Obama Says He’s Close to a “First Amendment Absolutist,” Then Adds a “But,” Criticizes “Certain Kinds of Speech”

 

President Barack Obama has reemerged in the media, as the election campaign in the US is picking up pace.

And he got his two cents in on a range of issues, including free speech in the context of the First Amendment, “misinformation,” social networks vs. democracy – as his politically like-minded comrades like to position the situation – and, of course, the role of “AI.”

Obama was a guest on a Verge podcast when he – a former US president, twice sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the country’s Constitution – seemed to water down the meaning of that oath.

At one point, he told the host that he is “close” to being a First Amendment “absolutist” – only to add, “but we have laws against certain kinds of speech that we deem to be really harmful to the public health and welfare.”

Obama’s understanding of the First Amendment, according to this statement, is not that this legislation is there to protect the right to free speech – but rather that it should secure a “marketplace” of various ideas.

In his own words: “(…) these ideas battle themselves out, and ultimately, we can all judge better ideas versus worse ideas. I deeply believe in that core principle (of the First Amendment).”

“Misinformation” is another issue troubling Obama, where he seems somewhat skeptical about the government’s ability to regulate the field (obviously – to his political slant).

But the former president has ideas about how it might be done: “We need to think about different platforms and different business models.”

Furthermore – “It may be that I’m perfectly happy to have AI mediate how I buy jeans online. That could be very efficient. I’m perfectly happy with it. So if it’s a shopping app or thread, fine.”

But – what if it’s about speech, or as he put it, “marketplace of ideas”?
There, Obama would like to see regulation that would “broaden” people’s perspectives. Let his audience be the judge of the direction this (political) “broadening” would be taking, and at the expense of what.

The interview came after sitting US president, Joe Biden, signed what is described as “a sweeping executive order about AI.”

Obama has not previously been known as an expert on these matters (apparently, his “expertise” stems from being a prominent victim of deepfakes), but now he has a lot to say about “AI”. Mostly, how those tech companies at the forefront should “regulate” matters pertaining to this technology.

On this front, one of the key messages Obama was trying to push during the podcast is to “recruit” actual tech and “AI” experts into a segment of the US Digital Service that was launched during his time in office. In this context, he urged professionals to “sign up” at ai.gov and work “for the common good.”

 

STATE-SPONSORED SPEECH FLAGGING

 

 

Republican State Lawmakers Call For Halt of Oregon’s Election “Misinformation” Big Tech Flagging Program

 

A newly-planned initiative by the Secretary of State’s office in Oregon is rightfully under fire over concerns of potentially infringing on free speech. A faction of 27 Republican state legislators have raised allegations stating that the strategy, which aims at stemming the flow of election “misinformation,” could inhibit the freedom of expression amongst the citizens of Oregon.

These lawmakers, led by State Representative Ed Diehl, jointly addressed their protests through a letter to Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade. Rep. Diehl then took to social media on Wednesday to publicize the letter.

 

 

The GOP legislators assert that a contract was handed over to a UK-based firm, Logically, last month, a contract that permits the company to scan online conversations for potential threats. Furthermore, the project allegedly empowers an artificially intelligent system to categorize and tag what should be deemed as “misinformation.”

Laura Kerns from Griffin-Valade’s office confirms that a request for proposal (RFP) was indeed put forth and a company from the UK is among those in consideration. She adamantly points out, however, “We have not signed a contract at this time.”

 

 

 

The tech-enabled solution, Republicans insist, would subsequently provoke social media platforms into stifling their users. Kerns, however, paid the usual lip service that government agencies have paid to free speech, adding “The Secretary of State’s office has no authority, ability or desire to censor speech. We do have a very real need to protect the people and infrastructure that make our democracy work, and provide accurate information through official channels.”

Additionally, Kerns mentions the Secretary of State’s office seeks “A system to review websites, social media, and blogs to notify us of threats and misinformation in a manner similar to a Google news alert.”

In other words, Kerns claims they’re not censoring Americans, *only* surveilling the speech of Americans.

The perspective-goal system will only track publicly available content and use it as a means to accomplish two goals, “One: To identify credible threats to public safety that we will share with law enforcement. And two: To better understand how we can most effectively share accurate information with voters by seeing what information is circulating.”

 

FACING POSSIBLE SUSPENSION

 

 

Ontario Doctor Who Rejected Covid Mandates Is Found Guilty of Spreading “Misinformation,” Raising Free Speech Concerns

 

Freedom of speech, an enduring pillar of democratic society, is seemingly being challenged in Canada, where the Ontario Physicians and Surgeons Discipline Tribunal has passed a verdict deeming Dr. Mark Trozzi guilty of professional misconduct.

The tribunal’s grounds for this judgement? According to them, it was Dr. Trozzi’s dissent from authorities’ views on Covid-19 mandates, which they categorized as “misinformation.”

The ruling highlights the debate surrounding free speech in the realm of healthcare.

Dr. Trozzi isn’t just subtly questioning government-imposed Covid health policies. Rather, he’s actively criticizing them, which the tribunal has taken as spreading mistruths intentionally. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) firmly believes in their right to limit free speech under the guise of safeguarding public interest – an idea that becomes sincerely troubling when viewed through the lens of free speech.

Dr. Trozzi’s advocates insist that this is an obstruction to free speech, one of the essential freedoms Canadians hold dear, as reported by The Epoch Times. Nevertheless, the tribunal showed stark obstinacy towards protecting such fundamental rights. Dr. Trozzi’s plea that prohibitions on his expression could stifle other medical professionals from catalyzing necessary scientific discussions fell on deaf ears.

 

Thanks for reading,

Reclaim The Net

2023-02-19 Ontario Doctors who Dissented from Covid-19 Doctrines Fight for their Professional Lives. by Jason Unrau. C2C Journal.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 132023
 
Jason Unrau tells the larger story of Ontario medical practitioners who DISSENTED.  Their stories are shocking.
Crystal Luchkiw’s medical licence was suspended by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario – – her story is new to me.
Patrick Phillips, a former emergency room physician in northern Ontario, criticized public health measures and vaccine coercion; the CPSO suspended his licence;  he faces financial ruin.   (The article was published in Feb 2023.)
Dr. Trozzi is covered; Jordan Pederson – – whose cases I posted about previously.
Doctors Chris Shoemaker, Rochagne Kilian, Caroline Turek and Jean-Marc Benoit, being represented by Rocco Galati.   . . .
Some of you may want to subscribe to the substack of Jason Unrau. . . . .

 

Politicized Medicine

What would Hippocrates Do? Ontario Doctors who Dissented from Covid-19 Doctrines Fight for their Professional Lives

Jason Unrau
February 19, 2023
It hardly seemed the stuff of “professional misconduct and incompetence.” The wrong kind of hand towel hung in a patient washroom. An incorrectly worded report. Some pointed Tweets. Pushing the bounds of patient advocacy. Yet these are among the triggers used by Ontario’s medical college to destroy the careers and livelihoods of physicians who departed from the official Covid-19 narrative and exercised independent professional judgment in treating their patients. In so doing, the regulatory body also robbed patients of their doctors amidst a worsening physician shortage. Jason Unrau reports on three suspended Ontario doctors who – like psychologist Jordan Peterson – are waging a spirited defence. There are many more like them across Canada.
Narration

The day Crystal Luchkiw’s medical licence was suspended by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, nearly 1,700 patients – many of them elderly and in palliative care – lost their family doctor. Even the referrals and prescriptions Luchkiw had already provided were nullified. “The very next morning, we’re getting phone calls from all the pharmacies in my community saying, ‘What is going on? We can’t fill any of these prescriptions,’” the Barrie-based Luchkiw, a 2012 graduate of McMaster University, recalls in an interview. “Every single one I wrote, every single test I ordered prior to my suspension, all of those were denied.”

The fateful event – effective midnight last March 17 – came as a shock to Luchkiw, and was potentially devastating to her patients. Hardly a Canadian needs reminding of the long waiting times for nearly anything to do with publicly funded health care. Suddenly, Luchkiw’s patients had to start over at the back of the queue. “My patients were denied medications and denied access to the tests that were essential for life-threatening illnesses,” says Luchkiw, still in disbelief. They included at least one patient who urgently needed a biopsy for a likely cancer.

The doctor is out: Crystal Luchkiw, a palliative care specialist at Barrie, Ontario’s Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, had her medical licence suspended over allegations of “professional misconduct.” Her apparent transgressions? Exercising caution and rational skepticism in a healthcare system twisted by pandemic politics.

Such a serious move by a professional regulatory body implies a serious professional or ethical transgression, or posing a threat to someone under the professional’s care. Was Luchkiw suspected of over-prescribing addictive painkillers to a patient who only needed Tylenol? Of failing to spot early signs of cancer in a patient who quickly became terminally ill? Of fraudulent billing? Of sexually harassing a patient or employee? It was nothing of the sort. Instead, Luchkiw’s suspension for “professional misconduct or incompetence,” yet to be proven, is for allegedly spreading Covid-19 “misinformation” on social media (i.e., exercising her right to free speech on her own time), allegedly seeking to treat Covid-19 infections by writing “off-label” prescriptions (a highly common practice in many other contexts), and allegedly writing medical exemptions for patients concerned about possible serious side-effects from the mRNA vaccine.

“Every patient matters”: Becoming infuriated at the “complete deviation from any kind of compassion or empathy” in the healthcare system, Luchkiw continued advocating for end-of-life visits by family which had been all-but outlawed in Ontario. (Source of photo: AP Photo/Kathy Willens)

The palliative care specialist at Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, admittedly, has been stubbornly independent since the opening weeks of the pandemic. As provinces locked down in spring 2020, Luchkiw soon fell at odds with colleagues by lobbying for end-of-life visitations, which were basically outlawed in Ontario. Luchkiw was determined to prevent her patients from dying alone. She puts it simply: “To me every life, every patient matters, because that is how we provide equitable, compassionate care.”

Luchkiw became infuriated at the “complete deviation from any kind of compassion or empathy” that she witnessed in the health care system and in many of her colleagues. Despite an increasingly “adversarial” work environment, however, she says she never wavered from advocating for her clients. Luchkiw’s dying patients would turn out to be some of the luckier ones; across the nation thousands of others died neglected, alone, afraid and in some cases starving and dehydrated.

It did not take long for Luchkiw to notice that the medical process was being twisted by pandemic politics as the healthcare system became fixated on Covid-19. She says she was pressured to change a death certificate from what she considered the primary cause – an advanced cancer in an elderly patient – to Covid-19 merely because test results came in positive just after the patient passed away. Luchkiw refused, but the pressure continued from multiple levels.

From Caution to Coercion

Luchkiw is anything but an “anti-vaxxer.” Like tens of millions of other Canadians, she had as a child received the usual battery of immunizations. As a doctor, she recommended the same to her pediatric patients and counselled older patients where appropriate for optional vaccination against shingles and pneumonia – which her nurse administered in the practice. Nor was Luchkiw opposed to the new mRNA injections against Covid-19 at first. “There were patients that I absolutely recommended it for,” she states.

The mother of two was not prepared to surrender caution or rational skepticism, however. After all, the mRNA technology is a sharp departure from conventional vaccines which, due to its rapid emergency approval, had not been comprehensively tested and posed unknowable long-term effects on recipients. “There were patients that I had very serious informed consent discussions with, so they knew that they were not part of the group that was studied – pregnant women in particular – and that there were no long-term studies, there were no genotoxic studies,” Luchkiw explains. “There was just absolutely insufficient evidence for me to be able to recommend it as a blanket approach to a complex human problem.”

“Insufficient evidence”: Luchkiw is anything but an “anti-vaxxer” but she rejected the “blanket approach” to using vaccines without comprehensive studies proving they were safe. (Source of photo: afhto.ca)

Initially, governments seemed to share this caution, and Luchkiw appeared to be steering within the lanes of government and regulatory guidance. A trickle of Covid-19 vaccinations commenced in Canada in late December 2020, mostly for elderly residents of Quebec and Ontario nursing homes. Canada’s botched deal with China’s CanSino Biologics had put Canadians at the end of order queues for the Astra-Zeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. By early 2021, countries like the U.S. and Israel had already given millions of first doses.

But within weeks of things at last ramping up in Canada, the hoped-for omnipotent antiviral shield was showing scratches and dents. That May, Ontario’s government acknowledged medical concerns about the shots and shelved AstraZeneca’s version due to its blood-clotting risks, especially among over-50 patients. The next month Theresa Tam, Chief Public Health Officer of Canada, announced a compensation program for those “who have experienced a serious or permanent injury after receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine.” This was unprecedented in the history of vaccination in Canada. The federal government also indemnified the vaccine manufacturers. Then, with Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA technology the only option for Canadians, came concerns of heightened risks of myocarditis and pericarditis (serious inflammations of the heart), particularly among young men.

Canada’s public health agency counted more than 5,800 Canadians who suffered from vaccine injuries of ‘special interest’. Among these are 55 cardiac arrests, 87 ‘spontaneous abortions,’ nearly 1,150 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis, 287 strokes, 144 heart attacks, 519 pulmonary embolisms, 327 blood clots and 185 cases of Bell’s Palsy.

Tweet

“When I started to see all of these issues, and evidence emerging, it became very clear to me that there was no way at this moment in time that we could claim any kind of safety for the Covid-19 vaccines,” recalls Luchkiw. She soon came to regard the mRNA injections as “an experiment, an investigational product” that “was being forced upon everyone.” (The unique aspects of mRNA treatments, how they differ from traditional vaccines and some of the risks they might pose are discussed in this C2C essay.)

In August 2021 Ontario’s Doug Ford government imposed a “vaccine mandate” for public-sector employees, healthcare workers and support staff in healthcare facilities. In effect, it meant get the shot or lose your job. Yet in late September, Nancy Whitmore, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario’s (CPSO) Registrar, published an “eDialogue” column emailed to member physicians. It cited advice from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) that Covid-19 vaccination exemptions could be given if the recipient of a first injection suffered a severe allergic or anaphylactic reaction or if the recipient of a first injection suffered diagnosed myocarditis or pericarditis.

In an unprecedented move, Chief Public Health Officer of Canada Theresa Tam announced a compensation program for those who suffered serious side-effects from vaccinations. Yet doctors were not supposed to question pushing the new mRNA vaccines on their patients. (Source of left photo: The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld)

At time of this article’s publication, Canada’s public health agency counted nearly 10,600 “serious” adverse events caused by Covid-19 vaccination, including 5,800 Canadians who suffered from vaccine injuries of “special interest.” Among these are 55 cardiac arrests, 87 “spontaneous abortions,” nearly 1,150 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis, 287 strokes, 144 heart attacks, 519 pulmonary embolisms, 327 blood clots and 185 cases of Bell’s Palsy. Luchkiw says her brother suffered myocarditis after his first dose and a heart attack in front of his children after his second shot.

There was, in other words, a solid basis for physicians and patients to remain cautious about the Covid-19 vaccines. Such caution appeared to be backed by guidance or implied in other actions by recognized authorities. And it would be borne out by evidence that continues to accumulate today. Yet Luchkiw was being treated like a heretic. In October 2021 she resigned her position at the Barrie hospital after herself declining the Covid-19 vaccine. She was by far not the only one to do so; across Canada many tens of thousands of medical personnel lost their jobs – usually without pay and often without even EI – at a time when the healthcare system needed them most.

A Sinister Knock on the Door

There had been a few complaints about Luchkiw’s social media posts in late 2020. That appears to have been all until the following summer, when a patient lodged a complaint for Luchkiw’s alleged failure to observe some Covid-19 protocols in her practice and for discouraging people from taking the vaccine. That September the local health authority asked the CPSO to investigate Luchkiw’s practice for not following some Covid-19 protocols. The same month someone complained to the CPSO by e-mail about an interview Luchkiw gave that, allegedly, convinced one viewer to decline their second Covid-19 shot. Schedule 2 of Ontario’s Registered Health Professionals Act requires “reasonable and probable grounds” to commence an investigation. And in early November 2021, the CPSO’s Family Practice Complaints Committee dismissed the latter complaint for insufficient evidence.

Two CPSO investigators sent to Luchkiw’s practice demanded to see confidential patient files, and threatened suspension if she did not comply; Luchkiw would later sue the College seeking a judicial review but the court denied her application. Shown on top is the CPSO’s headquarters in Toronto, Ontario. (Source of photo: drtrozzi.org)

Yet six days later, the CPSO launched its formal investigation, pursuant to s.75(1)(a) of the Health Professionals Procedural Code, into whether Luchkiw “in her family medicine practice, and also in her conduct, including in relation to infection prevention and control practices and communications and conduct regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, has engaged in professional misconduct or is incompetent.” That same month a senior doctor at Royal Victoria wrote the CPSO to complain that Luchkiw had provided a vaccination exemption to a liver transplant recipient (it would later turn out the patient in question never produced the document, so it remains unclear whether it exists).

But none of this was as intimidating as what occurred on November 29, 2021, when two CPSO “investigators” showed up unannounced at Luchkiw’s practice, located in a Barrie retirement home. They demanded patient files and, according to Luchkiw, threatened to suspend her licence if she didn’t comply. “They had no grounds or any right to investigate my office and go through my patients’ private confidential medical records,” Luchkiw said in the interview. “It was terrifying.” Luchkiw phoned her lawyer, who advised her to give them nothing and not to let them enter the practice.

Luchkiw quickly realized the CPSO’s associated orders authorized the college investigators to examine not only her infectious disease protocol but her social media posts as a private citizen and “my entire family medicine practice.” Luchkiw concluded the college wanted to “take every patient record to find whatever to nail me on later.” In her mind, she was now the target of “a witch hunt.” Unfortunately, following a shift change the incoming office receptionist allowed the CPSO duo to enter, and although they were unable to seize records they entered the patient washroom and took photos of a hand towel that violated public health guidelines (Luchkiw says directly beside it sat a stack of paper towels, which the investigators apparently did not photograph).

The Ontario College also set its sights on a number of other independent-minded physicians, employing similar tactics as against Luchkiw. Medical colleges in other provinces reportedly duplicated Ontario’s approach. There are possibly hundreds more such cases across Canada.

Tweet

Things slid further downhill. In March 2022 came Luchkiw’s abrupt suspension. On the advice of her lawyer, she then sued the CPSO in Ontario divisional court seeking a judicial review. Sixty-six patients signed affidavits attesting to the negative effects of her suspension on their wellbeing. The divisional court declined to accept the affidavits as evidence and last October denied her application.

Three Doctors Fight Back – The “Moving Parties” Challenge

During this same period the CPSO also set its sights on a number of other independent-minded physicians, employing similar tactics as against Luchkiw. Many of these physicians remain unknown to the public. Medical colleges in other provinces reportedly duplicated Ontario’s approach. There are possibly hundreds more such cases across Canada. The CPSO refuses even to acknowledge how many doctors it has investigated or suspended.

Two of them, however, decided to publicize their situation: Patrick Phillips and Mark Trozzi. They got together with Luchkiw and launched a three-way “moving parties” challenge of the CPSO’s reasons for investigating them. The three physicians are charged with “making misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures concerning COVID-19,” “failing to cooperate with College investigations,” and “issuance of vaccine exemptions.” They challenged the CPSO’s actions on the basis of administrative and constitutional law.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) warned that doctors “publicly contradicting” public health recommendations could face investigation and disciplinary action. CPSO Registrar Nancy Whitmore later claimed this was not intended to stifle “healthy debate” – but the college was soon investigating doctors for exactly that.

At the heart of the challenge lies a strange statement the CPSO posted on its website and social media channels on April 30, 2021 warning physicians “who are publicly contradicting public health orders and recommendations” that they “may face an investigation by the CPSO and disciplinary action.” This seemingly direct assault on Charter-protected freedom of expression (as well as statutory and common-law rights of professional judgment) triggered nationwide pushback from physicians, who signed the Declaration of Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth. It accuses the college of denying the scientific method by stifling debate and violating the principles of evidence-based medicine and the right to informed consent.

Following this, CPSO Registrar Whitmore sent a letter to members claiming the statement was merely directed at a “small group of physicians spreading blatant misinformation” including “anti-vaccine and anti-masking sentiments.” She insisted that, “It is not intended to stifle physicians from engaging in healthy debate about other measures aimed at addressing public safety during the pandemic.” This placed Whitmore in the curious position of implicitly selecting which particular public health measures Ontario’s physicians were now allowed to debate (if not masking, could they criticize lockdowns?), as well as which physicians were allowed to participate (anyone not in the “small group”?). As it happened, the college was already or soon would be actively investigating doctors for doing what Whitmore said she was not attempting to “stifle.”

The CPSO’s assault on Charter-protected freedom of expression triggered nationwide pushback from physicians who signed a declaration saying it denied the scientific method by quashing debate and violated the principles of evidence-based medicine and the right to informed consent.

Michael Alexander is a Toronto lawyer representing Luchkiw, Phillips and Trozzi. Alexander argues that the CPSO committed multiple violations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in targeting his clients. In addition, its attempts to restrict what its members could say about pandemic measures were arbitrary and ill-founded, lacked the force of law and, accordingly, could not form the basis of a charge of professional misconduct or incompetence.

“These restrictions just showed up at various times on the college website, they have nothing to do with the [Registered Health Professionals Act], they are not regulations passed by [the provincial] cabinet,” Alexander says in an interview. “They are not policies passed by college council, they just all of a sudden got thrown into the mix on the website and the college has gone forward and used them as a basis for prosecuting doctors and taking away their licences.”

The doctors also challenged Whitmore’s authority to issue sweeping demands for documents, including patient records, which amounted to a “fishing expedition.” This also placed the physicians in the dilemma of either violating federal privacy laws or refusing the CPSO’s demands – a refusal which itself has formed charges against Luchkiw and Phillips.

Alexander believes that not only the CPSO but medical colleges across the country have stepped far outside their legal mandates in a coordinated effort and that their attempts to seize more power for themselves threaten the integrity of healthcare for all Canadians. “There are dozens of doctors across the province and hundreds of doctors across the country who are in the same situation because all the colleges have adopted the same restrictions, and in the same way,” Alexander says. “On its face it’s so outrageous, it boggles my mind that they would even dare to do this.”

“Boggles my mind”: Toronto lawyer Michael Alexander, who represents Luchkiw and two other doctors targeted by the CPSO, calls the College’s attempt to silence its members “outrageous.”

The moving parties challenge before the CPSO’s medical tribunal did not appear to go well for the three doctors. On January 19, the tribunal dismissed their challenge outright and they will now face a full disciplinary hearing, along with all of the stress, time and expense that this entails.

The tribunal did not, however, rule their Charter-based arguments invalid, merely saying that these ought to be part of the disciplinary hearings. More remarkably, in rejecting the doctors’ attempt to invalidate the investigations, the tribunal held that the CPSO’s April 2021 postings and related statements were, indeed, merely guidance. “The College agrees that the Statements are properly characterized as guidance documents, not binding rules,” its decision reads. This seemed like a major win for the challengers. Nonetheless, the tribunal held that the CPSO had suspended them for other alleged infractions, thereby sending the entire dispute onward to the next level.

The disciplinary hearings for Luchkiw, Phillips and Trozzi have not yet been scheduled.

From Emergency Room Physician to Bankrupt Cabin-Dweller

In the spring of 2020, as he and hospital staff in Englehart, Ontario (population 1,479, located 560 km north of Toronto) prepared for SARS-Cov-2 to spread across Canada and into their community, Patrick Phillips recalls how everyone was scared of the unknown. But as lockdowns wore on and the threat of actual Covid-19 markedly eased, his skepticism and professional independence put him on a collision course with the college regulator.

Phillips began noticing that the official public health narrative contradicted some of his core beliefs about the practice of medicine as well as his observations and research about Covid-19. He was perplexed by the intensifying official hostility towards off-label use of drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin for early treatment of Covid-19.

Tweet

Similarly to Luchkiw, Phillips, an emergency room locum physician in Kirkland Lake and Nipigon Lake as well as Englehart, believed that regardless of lockdowns and the non-stop barrage of public health and media messaging, the practice of medicine as such would continue as before: physicians were bound to care for their individual patients and take account of their unique circumstances, were entrusted with substantial latitude to exercise professional judgment in selecting treatments and medications (including off-label use of otherwise-proven medications), should never coerce their patients, and were supposed to report the truth as they saw it. And like Luchkiw, Phillips has had all four beliefs shattered, enduring not only public ridicule and slander but professional and financial ruin at the hands of the medical system and CPSO. Today the doctor lives in a small cabin outside Englehart and subsists on modest speaking fees from supporters.

Patrick Phillips, a former emergency room physician in northern Ontario, criticized public health measures and vaccine coercion; the CPSO suspended his licence and he’s now facing financial ruin.

“In the spring of 2020, I was buying into [the danger of Covid-19] and of course we saw all the state propaganda from Chinese television and were preparing for the worst,” Phillips recalls in an interview. “But then we learned that Covid-19 doesn’t cause people just falling over in the street.” Phillips began noticing that the official public health narrative contradicted some of his core beliefs about the practice of medicine as well as his observations and research about Covid-19. He was perplexed, for example, by the intensifying official hostility towards off-label use of drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin for early treatment of Covid-19.

“There has never been anything like this against drugs that have been around for a long time and proven themselves to be effective,” says Phillips. But then, he notes, the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet “put out a study showing that hydroxychloroquine was dangerous, that it caused cardiac arrhythmia.” Canadian doctors were soon barred from using it and ivermectin, even though section 5.1 of Ontario’s Medicine Act prohibits the prosecution of a doctor for “non-traditional therapies.” The Lancet later retracted the study – but only after hydroxychloroquine had been discredited throughout the developed world.

Phillips was perplexed by the official hostility toward off-label use of drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. “There has never been anything like this against drugs that have been around for a long time and proven themselves to be effective,” he says. (Source of photo: Shutterstock)

Phillips also became deeply concerned about the destructive effects of cancelling in-person schooling, closing businesses, forbidding healthy everyday activities and other lockdown-style measures, effects he witnessed among patients presenting in emergency rooms. Already by May 2020, the data clearly showed Covid-19’s severity was stratified according to age and overall personal health. More than 80 per cent of victims suffered from multiple co-morbidities, and the mean age of death was 83.8 – older than Canada’s average life expectancy. Why, then, did governments persist with their whole-of-society approach? Very few in the medical system seemed interested in questioning how things were being done, however.

“I thought there needs to be some sort of debate on this subject,” Phillips notes. “We need to weigh the benefits, if there are any, but also the costs.” So in December 2020 he took to Twitter to report what he was seeing in the hospitals. That New Year’s Eve he did an interview with Bright Light News in which he criticized Covid-19 public health measures and expressed concerns about the lack of long-term safety data for the fast-tracked vaccines which had just begun to roll out. Phillips New Year’s Eve statements were prescient; many of his worries would come to bitter fruition.

Phillips was especially disturbed by much of his profession’s decision to distance itself from patients, such as through so-called telehealth. “People were being treated over the phone with opioids when it was actually a giant tumour,” Phillips alleges. “And because we switched to phone medicine [such a patient] didn’t get a proper physical. And lots of serious health issues were missed because people were too afraid to come to the hospital.” Concurrently, “there was also an uptick in suicidal tendencies and drug use, an uptake in suicidal children, not just teens or older people, but children six to eight years old.”

Phillips also raised concerns that the move to so-called “telehealth” was putting patients at risk and that keeping children inside was leading to serious mental health issues, even suicidal ideation among the very young. (Source of photos: Pexels)

He decided to buck Ontario’s attempt to limit people to one short walk or shopping trip per day for “essential” items. “For some kids I told their parents to let them go outside and play, ‘get some fresh air and exercise,’” Phillips recalls. “So that was me counselling them to break public health rules but at that point, what else are you going to do?” As the pandemic passed its one-year anniversary, the Ontario government and much of the medical system seemed oblivious to the harms they had already caused. In April 2021 the Ontario Medical Association called for more severe lockdowns. Phillips kept speaking out in opposition.

That same month, Phillips received a curious letter from Glenn Corneil, acting medical health officer for Timiskaming Health Unit, admonishing Phillips for filing five “adverse event following immunization” reports for reactions to Covid-19 vaccination. Only one of these met the Ontario government’s then-diagnostic criteria, which recognized only seven mRNA-caused adverse reactions. At that time, the vaccines had existed for barely six months; it seems arrogant for any organization to claim such certainty. “I encourage you to review the [December 2020] Provincial Case Definitions for Diseases of Public Health Significance,” Corneil wrote. “I hope you will find this useful in identifying these reactions.”

‘If you’re under duress, you cannot give valid consent. Up until the end of 2020, that was considered assault and battery and you could press charges. The criminal law didn’t change, but the whole culture did.’

Tweet

Phillips says it is not the physician’s job to conform to a government list. “We’re not supposed to determine if there was a causal relationship,” he explains. “We’re supposed to report new or worsening symptoms after taking the pharmaceutical product and that’s exactly what I did.” These included, for example, severe allergic reactions or symptoms of blood-clotting and strokes in patients who came to the emergency ward at Englehart & District Hospital.

While Corneil did forward Phillips’ reports to the provincial system, he also reported Phillips to the medical college and on April 23, 2021 Whitmore ordered an investigation against him. “There were nine vaccine injuries altogether that I reported,” says Phillips. “They charged me with professional misconduct for reporting them and the reason they cited was because [injuries] aren’t generally expected.” The CPSO also cited his social media activity and a seemingly minor medical incident at the hospital.

Glenn Corneil, acting medical health officer for Timiskaming Health Unit, admonished Phillips for filing five “adverse event” reports following Covid-19 vaccinations, noting they didn’t all meet the government’s limited diagnostic criteria at the time. (Source of photo: Facebook/Timiskaming Health Unit)

Phillips was not immediately suspended; nor was he deterred. As governments responded heavy-handedly to the growing doubts about the Covid-19 vaccines, Phillips like Luchkiw stuck to the centuries-old medical principle of informed consent. “Patients [were] coming to me crying because they’ve been forced to take this or they’re going to lose their jobs,” he recalls. “If you’re under duress, you cannot give valid consent. Up until the end of 2020, that was considered assault and battery and you could press charges. The criminal law didn’t change, but the whole culture did.”

In May 2022 the CPSO suspended Phillips’ medical licence pending a disciplinary hearing. Phillips expects the college to permanently revoke his licence to practice. With his livelihood gone, he continues to do speaking engagements financed by supporters, most recently in Hamilton for a live panel discussion with other doctors and scientists. His Twitter account, suspended in late 2021, was recently reinstated under new owner Elon Musk.

“I’m sad about my career, I don’t see it at all that I threw it away though,” Phillips reflects. “I did what I thought was right, I still feel that way. I couldn’t have lived with myself, knowing what I know about the science, about the vaccines, for me to just shut up and say nothing. That would’ve thrown away much more in my life than my medical career.”

Silence! In charging Phillips with professional misconduct, the college cited his social media activity.

As time advances, the evidence continues to accumulate in Phillips’ favour. For one thing, Ontario’s list of recognized adverse vaccine events has been expanded to 16 reactions – encompassing most of those he previously identified. More broadly, multiple European countries, including all of Scandinavia, have either stopped recommending Covid-19 shots for children or never did so at all. Last year, Denmark halted its Covid-19 vaccination program altogether. The Canadian corporate media ignored all of this. Perhaps most surprisingly, in early February Quebec officially recommended that healthy adults under age 60 stop taking boosters. This went almost unreported outside Quebec.

An ER Specialist Goes into Self-Imposed Exile

The provocateur: Before his licence was suspended, Mark Trozzi wrote vaccine exemptions of a sort bound to upset the CPSO. “I wrote saying if so-and-so doesn’t want the vaccine, it’s basically against the law to give it to them,” he says. “You don’t need a reason to refuse a medical intervention like this.”

Among the trio of Ontario doctors, Mark Trozzi comes closest to what a critic might call a provocateur. Prior to the pandemic, Trozzi had racked up 25 years of emergency and trauma care experience and had taught advanced clinical trauma resuscitation at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, the University of Ottawa and Queen’s University. Unlike Luchkiw and Phillips, who were bewildered and dismayed by what befell them, Trozzi anticipated how the establishment would respond and prepared his affairs accordingly.

Trozzi would later write of how, in the pandemic’s first year, he watched hospitals and clinics “submit to the endless top-down roll out from governments, of questionable new rules, protocols, and procedures.” As more and more workers bought into or knuckled under pressure to conform to the official narrative, honest dialogue deteriorated from being merely “uncomfortable,” as one administrator put it, to all-but impossible. While Trozzi first decided to “bite my tongue” in order to get along, soon he felt this was “ethically impossible.” In November 2020 he began to wind down his emergency room work.

Early the next year Trozzi decided to break his silence in dramatic fashion, launching a website as a clearinghouse of all-things Covid-related, from the virus’s origins to the experimental mRNA shots. His first post was entitled “Useful advice to improve your Immunity,” followed by a video called “This is Not a Vaccine” and then a lengthy article, “Covid Testimony” (from which the quotation in the previous paragraph is taken) about what he saw during the first pandemic year.

Curiously, the suspension came after Trozzi and another physician, Chris Shoemaker, travelled to Barrie to assist some of Luchkiw’s patients left in the lurch by her suspension. They were providing what is known as ‘locum’ work at another physician’s request – an everyday practice in medicine.

Tweet

Convinced that medical regulators would soon come after him, Trozzi began to prepare systematically. In February 2021 he resigned from his ER positions and soon thereafter sold his house. “I didn’t want to destroy a career that I’d spent my life building, so I resigned,” Trozzi recalls in an interview. “I thought, ‘Well, it’s better to chip it down a bit and to be able to rebuild it, than let it be destroyed.’” Remaining silent, however, was no longer an option: “There’s no way I’d live with myself if I didn’t do something, you know, basically get on a rooftop and shout the truth.”

Based on his belief that no medical treatment should be pushed until the patient has achieved informed consent, and that patients always have a right to refuse, Trozzi had been writing vaccine exemptions of a kind and in a manner bound to be considered provocative. “I wrote on a piece of paper basically saying if so-and-so doesn’t want the vaccine, it’s basically against the law to give it to them,” he says. “You don’t need a reason to refuse a medical intervention like this.”

Deciding it was “ethically impossible” to stay silent, Trozzi launched a website to push back.

The CPSO pounced, in February 2021 barring Trozzi from writing mask and vaccine exemptions and in December 2022 suspending his licence entirely. Curiously, the suspension came after Trozzi and another physician, Chris Shoemaker, travelled to Barrie to assist some of Luchkiw’s patients left in the lurch by her suspension. They were providing what is known as “locum” work at another physician’s request – an everyday practice in medicine. But within half a day of their arrival, Trozzi asserts, “The college got wind of it and [soon after] suspended us.” Since then, Trozzi has continued to post material to his website almost daily.

The Upcoming Disciplinary Hearings and their Nationwide Implications

Alexander and his clients are buoyed by last month’s tribunal decision, even though it went against them. “The panel simply refused to address our key submission, which was that [Whitmore] did not have reasonable and probable grounds to order investigations of the doctors,” Alexander asserts. “Furthermore, the panel also ignored our submission that the College had failed to establish that the doctors had violated a standard of practice.”

Importantly, the tribunal created a glaring contradiction in holding that the CPSO’s pandemic-related rules were mere guidelines. “In taking this position, the panel could not explain the basis for the charges brought against the doctors,” Alexander notes. “This decision does not meet the most basic standards of legal reasoning.” This prompted Alexander to go back to the chair of the CPSO tribunal and argue that his clients deserve a chance to explore the implications of that finding in advance of the disciplinary hearings. The chair agreed and, on March, 10, Alexander will make that case in a public hearing before an adjudicator.

‘If we’re successful, that means the prosecution of all the other doctors being investigated by the college would have to come to an end as well,’ says Alexander. And if that happened in Ontario, it would be huge news to similarly-situated physicians in other provinces whose colleges aped Ontario’s tactics.

Tweet

Fellow Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati is representing four other physicians suspended by the CPSO: Chris Shoemaker, Rochagne Kilian, Caroline Turek and Jean-Marc Benoit. Galati says none of the four will be speaking directly to the media for the time being. But he is pointed in his description of what the CPSO is attempting to do to his clients. “Overreach by the college is understatement,” Galati says in an interview. “This is not just suppression of speech, but dictatorial, fascistic conduct, which actually endangers people’s lives. Because we’re not getting the best medicine coming out of a one-sided, politically/pharmaceutically driven agenda. You know, when has science debate ever been stifled or censored to this degree?”

Chris Shoemaker (left) and Rochagne Kilian (right) are two more physicians who have been suspended by the CPSO – actions that jeopardize their careers and reputations, not to mention the health of their patients.

In milder fashion, Alexander agrees with Galati that “there is no foundation in law” for licensed medical practitioners to be required to parrot public health orders under threat of sanction, or for a professional college prohibition against writing medical exemptions and prescribing alternative treatments. But if, on the other hand, “the Tribunal is going to say these things are just recommendations, the investigation orders are invalid,” Alexander says. “And in fact, that ends the prosecutions.” In these circumstances, that the CPSO failed to meet any threshold for investigating or sanctioning his clients, Alexander argues, “is Law School 101. This is not an esoteric argument. There’s an internal logic to this stuff. If you were writing a law exam for me, and I was your professor and you didn’t make this argument, you’d fail.”

A great deal is riding on this process. The livelihoods, careers, reputations and emotional wellbeing of Luchkiw, Phillips, Trozzi, Shoemaker, Kilian, Turek and Benoit, of course. The health care needs of hundreds if not thousands of patients who have not yet found a new family doctor or are languishing far down on a waiting list.

“Overreach by the college is understatement,” says Rocco Galati, a Toronto lawyer representing Shoemaker and Kilian. (Source of photo: The Canadian Press/Trevor Hagah)

But the implications extend much farther. “If we’re successful, that means the prosecution of all the other doctors being investigated by the college would have to come to an end as well,” says Alexander. And if that happened in Ontario, it would be huge news to similarly-situated physicians in other provinces whose colleges aped Ontario’s tactics – in Alexander’s view, colluding with Ontario to have a uniform Covid-19 policy across Canada.

A victory for these doctors would also make waves throughout Canada’s professions and quasi-professions, whose governing organizations are pursuing increasingly oppressive woke agendas. The most famous of this growing number of cases is Jordan Peterson, the Ontario psychologist and public intellectual whose college attempted to force him to endure “social media etiquette re-education” at his own expense on pain of expulsion. As Peterson recently noted on Twitter, “Canadians: your physicians, lawyers, psychologists and other professionals are now so intimidated by their commissar overlords that they fear to tell you the truth. This means that your care and legal counsel has been rendered dangerously unreliable.”

Governing organizations of other professions are also going after those who challenge official narratives; the best-known case is Jordan Peterson – but there are many more across Canada. (Source of photo: Gage Skidmore, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

In the meantime, however, these seven doctors and their unnamed colleagues are being ruined, and the health and wellbeing of thousands of their former patients are imperilled, because they exercised their freedom of conscience, their freedom of speech and their independent professional judgment.

Jason Unrau is an Ottawa-based freelance writer, researcher and contributor to C2C Journal.

Source of main image: Shutterstock.

2023-11-09 Saskatchewan: Regulatory body continues prosecution of nurse over free expression. JCCF report.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 132023
 

The heroine in this story is Saskatchewan nurse Leah McInnes.

Every person to whom you mention Leah McInnes’ story increases the size of her contribution to Canadian democracy.  Kind of like passing the puck in hockey.

Maybe you live in Regina;  maybe you will see Leah.  Please tell her  “God bless you” from me.  Think of how much easier it would have been for Leah to just cave to whatever they want from her.  She needs to know she has a sea of gratitude supporting her.

 

REGINA, SK: The Justice Centre announces that the disciplinary hearings against Saskatchewan nurse Leah McInnes continue today in what could become a landmark decision about freedom of expression for nurses and other professionals, and the power of regulatory bodies to control and censor the speech of professionals who are required to belong to a professional association in order to earn a living.

Exercising her Charter freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly, Saskatchewan Nurse Leah McInnes attended a national rally against mandatory Covid vaccination policies in early September 2021. Ms. McInnes also expressed her opposition to the government’s mandatory vaccination policies on social media between August and October 2021, even while stating that vaccines should be promoted by her profession, that vaccines can decrease severe disease, reduce the burden on the healthcare system and save lives, and that vaccines play a vital role in the fight against the Covid pandemic and should be promoted.

On September 26, 2021, a nurse filed a complaint against Ms. McInnes to the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS). The Discipline Committee of the CRNS investigated the social media activities of Ms. McInnes and then charged her with professional misconduct under the Registered Nurses Act for her posts and for her participation in the rally. The CRNS accused Ms. McInnes of spreading misinformation, disinformation and/or misleading information surrounding vaccine mandates and vaccine passports. Further, the Disciplinary Committee of the CRNS alleged that Ms. McInnes had been operating from a position of power as a nurse when participating in the rally and when posting about vaccines, that she had misused this power, and that she had acted outside the proper scope of this power.

Lawyers acting for Ms. McInnes point to the Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses of the CRNS, which says, “Nurses support a climate of trust that sponsors openness, encourages the act of questioning the status quo and supports those who speak out in good faith to address concerns.” Lawyers argue that Ms. McInnes had questioned the merits of mandatory vaccine policies in good faith. Further, counsel for Ms. McInnes argue that her expression, however disagreeable it may have been to the CRNS, is protected by section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and by relevant case law.

In particular, counsel for Ms. McInnes point to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruling in Strom v. Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Association, which states that “…criticism, even by those delivering those services, does not necessarily undermine confidence in healthcare workers or the healthcare system. Indeed, it can enhance confidence by demonstrating that those with the greatest knowledge of this massive and opaque system, and who have the ability to affect change, are both prepared and permitted to speak and pursue positive change. In any event, the fact that public confidence in aspects of the healthcare system may suffer as a result of fair criticism can itself result in positive change. Such is the messy business of democracy.”

Lawyers for Ms. McInnes argue that, rather than bringing the nursing profession under disrepute, the good-faith objections to mandatory vaccination policies promote public confidence in the transparency of the healthcare system and in the dedication of healthcare professionals to pursue positive change.

Andre Memauri, one of the lawyers representing Ms. McInnes, stated, “The Discipline Committee today will hear how Ms. McInnes advocated against vaccine mandates and vaccine passports in support of patient autonomy, dignity and privacy in compliance with her ethical obligations. The Investigation Committee alleges Ms. McInnes disseminated misinformation, disinformation and misleading information, all while the record established that Ms. McInnes was not only remarkably accurate but also that the social media activity of CRNS itself disseminated false information.”

“It is very unfortunate that a registered nurse in the Province of Saskatchewan again faces regulatory reprisal for fair criticism of the healthcare system, after the Court of Appeal’s decision in Strom,” continued Mr. Memauri.

John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre, stated, “This case is about the freedom of nurses and other professionals to participate, as citizens in a democracy, in public discussions and debate. This case raises important questions about whether government agencies like the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan should have the power to determine what is true or false, and to impose that determination on professionals who are required to join the regulatory body in order to practice their profession and earn a living.”

2023-11-08 Delay in Covid trial leads to stay of charge by prosecution. With thanks to the JCCF.

 Mercury poisoning, dental amalgams. See also Vaccinations.  No Responses »
Nov 132023
 

These cases are from the “News” tab of the  Justice Centre.  (JCCF).  With thanks!

They are a good way to learn more about the Rule of Law in Canada.   Citizens do not have the luxury of being ignorant in these matters.

IN spite of the enormity of the crimes against its own people, these cases are fought with grace.  And WON by people of courage, stamina,  and intelligence.  The number of wins just keeps mounting.   I am in awe.

 

WELLAND, ON: The Justice Centre announces that the Crown has stayed the charge against Kathryn Salmon on account of the unreasonable delay of her trial. Ms. Salmon was charged under the Quarantine Act in March of 2022 and fined $6,255 for allegedly refusing to take a Covid test upon returning to Canada.

On March 26, 2022, while Kathryn Salmon was returning to Canada from the United States, she allegedly refused to take a Covid test or use the ArriveCAN app. While she had requested an exemption to these requirements and had presented border agents with a suitable quarantine plan, her request was denied. The Public Health Agency of Canada charged her under the Quarantine Act and fined her $6,255. Ms. Salmon immediately requested a trial date, but the earliest trial date offered to her was November 3, 2023 – more than 19 months later.

Canadians have the right to be tried within a reasonable time pursuant to section 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In the provincial courts, including the Ontario Court of Justice, a delay of 18 months before the end of trial is presumed to be unreasonable.

Counsel for Ms. Salmon highlighted this defense to the Crown prosecutor, arguing that the trial of Ms. Salmon was unreasonably delayed.

In response, the Crown prosecutor agreed to stay the charge against Ms. Salmon, and did so on November 3, 2023

Lawyer Marty Moore, overseeing the case, stated, “It was never right to discriminate against Canadians on the basis of whether or not they took the Covid vaccines. It would not have been right to pursue this prosecution of Ms. Salmon, and we are glad the Crown has stayed the charge against her.”

2023-11-29 Quebec College of Physicians & Surgeons versus Naturopathic practitioners. Kudos to the Doctor who’s fighting in the Courts. Freedom of Choice in the care of health at stake

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Nov 132023
 
Is a Montreal naturopath being trapped by Quebec’s College of Physicians?

Alexa Lavoie (Rebel News) spoke with Annie Juneau, a naturopath, who explained how she and her colleagues live in constant fear of being targeted by fake clients.   (That’s what just happened.  The fake client was sent by the College of Physicians & Surgeons.)

https://www.rebelnews.com/montreal_naturopath_trapped_by_the_college_of_physicians

2023-11-08 U.S. Weapons Makers To Be Tried By War Crimes Tribunal Beginning November 12, 2023.

 George Bush war criminal, Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials)  No Responses »
Nov 082023
 

World BEYOND War is one of the organizers of this event.   It’s an effective organization, from the U.S..

U.S. Weapons Makers To Be Tried By War Crimes Tribunal Beginning November 12, 2023
Start: Sunday, November 12, 2023 8:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (US & Canada) (GMT-05:00)
This is a virtual event

Click here to view the event details.

Please share the registration page:

Click here to share this event on Facebook.

Click here to share this event on Twitter.

Or you can send your friends this link: https://actionnetwork.org/events/us-weapons-makers-to-be-tried-by-war-crimes-tribunal-beginning-november-12-2023?source=direct_link&

Or copy and paste the email below.

Thanks!

Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal

Copy and paste this email to friends to spread the word:

Subject: Can you come?

Friend,

I’m attending an event called U.S. Weapons Makers To Be Tried By War Crimes Tribunal Beginning November 12, 2023.

Please join us Sunday, November 12th, 2023 at 8:00 p.m. (EST) for the livestreamed Opening Session of the Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal holding U.S. Weapons Manufacturers accountable for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.

Testifying will be Cornel West, Richard Falk, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Norman Solomon, John Pilger, Jeremy Kuzmarov, Christian Sorensen, William Astore, Aisha Jumaan, Matt Aikens, Marie Dennis, Dr. Kelly Denton-Borhaug, and numerous others.

The Tribunal Judges will deliberate on the evidence presented and render a verdict at the conclusion of all testimony.

Can you join me? Click here for details and to RSVP: https://actionnetwork.org/events/us-weapons-makers-to-be-tried-by-war-crimes-tribunal-beginning-november-12-2023?source=email&

Thanks!

The Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal will hold accountable — through testimony of witnesses — U.S. Weapons manufacturers who knowingly produce and sell products which attack and kill non-combatants. These manufacturers may have committed Crimes Against Humanity as well as violated U.S. Federal criminal laws. The Tribunal will hear the evidence and render a verdict.

Donate to support the Tribunal.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries