TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @ShaunRickard67
reSee.it AI Summary
I see Toronto Police knocking doors over Facebook posts with hurty words about @MarkJCarney. Whether you agree with her, she didn’t break the law. They provided zero evidence. Weak men, egregious intimidation tactics—shame!
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Toronto Police already knocking doors/threatening arrests over Facebook posts with hurty words about, @MarkJCarney Whether or not you agree with this woman, she in no way broke the law They presented zero evidence. These are weak men using egregious intimidation tactics, shame! https://t.co/2JGzuJbtQZ
reSee.it AI Summary
Canada's dirty little secret: since the US secured its southern border, Mexican cartels moved operations to Canada, now industrial scale. Liberals know but sweep it under the rug. Watch the full video with Shawn Ryan and Katarina Szulc: https://youtu.be/vkp4aESy5Jg?si=petEr3VwAqfb4pkc
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING - Canada's dirty little secret Many of us already know that since the US secured the southern border, Mexican Cartels moved their operations and are now operating on an industrial scale in Canada, but it's worse than we ever imagined. The Liberals know this, but choose to sweep it under the rug. Watch the full length video with, @ShawnRyanShow and @KatarinaSzulc here: https://youtu.be/vkp4aESy5Jg?si=petEr3VwAqfb4pkc
Video Transcript AI Summary
Canada is described as sweeping the fentanyl issue under the rug by sources in the show, despite public moves like appointing a fentanyl czar and increasing northern border patrols after pressure from Trump and Kash Patel. The guest says Canadian law enforcement acknowledge the issue but feel resources are insufficient to crack down on transnational crime, with a sense that “the root of the problem” is not being addressed.
The guest reports that the planning and production of fentanyl have shifted to Canada, with cartel operatives setting up labs there. They describe how cartels, after crackdowns on the southern border, moved operations into Canada where a visa is not needed for a tourist entry, allowing quick setup and networking with preexisting Canadian gangs such as the Hells Angels, Brother’s Keepers, Red Scorpion, and United Nations gang. Precursors come through the Port of Vancouver, where less than 1% of cargo is inspected, enabling easy importation of chemicals. The guest asserts that the majority of fentanyl production now occurs in Canada, with a claim of 99% certainty, and cites an operative for the Sinaloa Cartel in Canada showing labs on West Coast resources.
Labs are described as often in suburban areas on farmland or small residences, not just in large urban centers. The production is said to have started in 2016-2017 as cartel operations moved into Canada, with ongoing Canadian law enforcement aware since then but under-resourced to counter transnational crime groups. The RCMP head reportedly estimated thousands of organized crime groups, but CSA’s Canadian intelligence suggests 668, highlighting a disconnect between agencies. The main cartel presence in Canada is labeled as Sinaloa and CJNG, with CJNG now possibly dominant due to Sinaloa’s weakening position and alliance with New Generation Cartel.
The Canadian fentanyl flow includes enforcers recruited from Canada, including Quebec and Ontario, who manage payments, protection, and border activities to facilitate drug movement and violence. Recruitment extends globally to the Balkans, Armenia, Australia, England, and other Commonwealth countries to leverage foreign nationals who can blend in and avoid detection. Group chats reveal Canadian area codes and explicit hits-for-hire offers, with examples of payments (e.g., 55,000 Canadian dollars for a hit) and weapon procurement requirements.
The border dynamics are described as significant: the northern border remains underprotected, allowing cross-border trafficking. The guest mentions that, even with a U.S. military or law enforcement option, the cartel leadership central to the operation would resist intensely if confronted on Mexican soil, implying that a direct US-backed intervention could be costly and dangerous for the cartel.
A notable case described is a “BC Superlab,” a large, sophisticated operation producing meth and fentanyl, recovered in rural BC and Surrey, BC. Authorities found 400 kilograms of meth, 54 kilograms of fentanyl, plus MDMA and cocaine, plus 46 handguns, 21 AR-15 style rifles, 14 submachine guns, two .50 cal rifles, explosives, body armor, and nearly $1 million in cash. The lab’s equipment included jacketed reactors and other specialized items, with large quantities of precursors (5,000 liters of liquid precursor and 10 tons of powder) and evidence they may have been producing P2P, a key meth precursor. The RCMP described the operation as extremely sophisticated, with a network of metal ducting to vent fumes and a setup suggesting an international cross-border network with potential ties to Mexican cartel operations and other global criminal networks. Health Canada is testing unusual equipment to see if it signals new production methods.
Investigators emphasize that the drugs were destined for abroad and that Vancouver’s infrastructure could facilitate expansion into Asia-Pacific markets, including China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Australia, and New Zealand. Despite the scale of the operation, only one person had been arrested at the time of reporting, underscoring the magnitude of the challenge and the global reach of the drug networks.
Overall, the conversation frames Canada as a critical, expanding node in an international fentanyl production and distribution network, with entrenched organizational complexity, cross-border logistics, and multilingual, multinational recruitment that complicates enforcement.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is there any anything that Canada has been doing to combat this at all, or they're just trying to sweep it under the rug?
Speaker 1: I think they're sweeping it under the rug. I think since Trump tried to say, you know, we gotta crack down on the northern border and Kesh Patel has been putting a lot of pressure, they've been doing these sort of public things, like, you know, the appointing of fentanyl czar, amping up the amount of border patrol at the northern border. But in terms of really getting to the root of the problem, it's being swept under the rug. And a lot of folks that I've spoken to in Canadian law enforcement agree with that notion.
Speaker 0: Welcome to the show.
Speaker 1: Thank you for having me.
Speaker 0: Man, you are getting some, like, amazing content down there with the cartels and and reporting on all that stuff.
Speaker 1: I asked them, you know, what do you think about Trump calling you and the people you work with in your networks terrorists? And how is this going to impact you? And it's so funny because I had anticipated the this reaction, but I didn't think that I should do this. We don't care. We're just gonna wait four years.
It's not that deep.
Speaker 0: Interesting. So what do you think? What is the plan then? Are they just gonna are they gonna stop running fentanyl across the border?
Speaker 1: I mean, fentanyl numbers have been going down, but I don't think that's the plan. The plan is to move operations, and I've been reporting on this extensively. It's all happening in Canada now. No one else is clocking it, and it's so obvious. It started during Trump's first administration when he first started cracking down on the Southern border.
Cartels knew they could go into Canada, and they didn't need a visa like they needed to get into The US. It was just a regular tourist visa. They didn't need to apply for anything or pay for anything. They could just go get their tourist like, have a regular tourist visa the way I come to The United States, set up shop, negotiate and network with pre existing organized crime groups in Canada, whether that be the Hells Angels, a big one, or Brother's Keepers or Red Scorpion or the United Nations gang, and say, hey, look, you guys have incredible access. Okay?
Over 5,000 miles of practically unprotected border into The United States. We can produce this product here and traffic it. Not to mention, a lot of these preexisting gangs were have have a large Asian populations. And what do we have in Vancouver? The Port Of Vancouver.
And where are the fentanyl precursors coming in? From China. So you move these precursors. The movement is now is come no no longer coming into Mexico. It's coming into Canada.
You set up shop. You increase profit. You tell all these guys that are already there, hey. Look. If you let us Sinaloa or Jalisco in to work with you guys, we're going to quadruple profits.
Speaker 0: So wait. You're saying that no more are you saying in addition to Mexico produced fentanyl or it's all moved to Canada?
Speaker 1: I think the majority has moved to Canada.
Speaker 0: The majority of it's moved to Canada?
Speaker 1: Yes. I am 99% sure about that because you can never be a 100% sure, but I am so sure about that. Last summer, I wanted to crack down on this story because I had an an individual reach out to me who was an operative for the Sinaloa Cartel working in Canada, running these labs.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And he showed me the labs that the Sinaloa Cartel is operating with Physically? Yep.
Speaker 0: What are they where are they putting them?
Speaker 1: They're putting them in suburban, sort of so in in they're particularly in the West Coast, in BC and in Alberta, which is, like, a prairie province. So there's a lot of farmland, and it's residential. And prior this, it was meth labs that they had running out there. And there would always be a random meth lab explosion in Abbotsford. This is a smaller city.
And then these turned into fentanyl labs that were completely under the radar because we also didn't have Canadian law enforcement, like, patrolling these areas to an extent that they would patrol, like, a large city like Vancouver or Toronto. So you're bringing in precursors from the Port Of Vancouver easily because less than 1% of cargo that comes into the Port Of Vancouver is actually inspected by authorities or
Speaker 0: Less than how much?
Speaker 1: Less than 1%.
Speaker 0: Less than 1%.
Speaker 1: An official number. Yes. So the majority of the cargo that's coming into the Port Of Vancouver is unmonitored, and you have longshoremen that are on organized crime payroll or turning a blind eye. These precursors are being brought to labs throughout the Lower Mainland, and they are producing fentanyl there. And it started off as distributing this product throughout Canada because just like The United States, there has been this insatiable appetite for fentanyl in Canada.
Mhmm. During the pandemic, more people at one point were dying of fentanyl overdose deaths than from COVID. So, that was a major health crisis.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And then, there's this major crackdown at the southern border. You already have cartel operatives established in the North. You have five over 5,000 miles of practically unprotected border. You know, it's Greenland, and, you can fly across. You can drive your boat across.
You can drive your dirt bike across. And that just left it as open field for these members of organized crime to start to bring their operations to the next level by trafficking everything into The United States. And it's important to keep in mind that Canadian law enforcement knows this is happening, very aware, has been aware since around 2017.
Speaker 0: Oh, this has been happening since 2017?
Speaker 1: It's been happening, yeah, 2016. Wow. It's this has been I would say for the past ten years exactly is when cartel operatives from Mexico started to move operations into Canada. Law enforcement knows this is happening, but Canadian law enforcement does not have the resources to crack down on this.
Speaker 0: How many precursors are there? Do you know?
Speaker 1: No. I don't I don't know how to make fentanyl. But it's fairly simple.
Speaker 0: How big are these labs? I mean, when you're when you say when you say a, you know, a meth lab, that's usually what, like a trailer out the middle of a field?
Speaker 1: A lot of these are just small, like single occupancy homes.
Speaker 0: Okay. Are So a farmhouse.
Speaker 1: Yes. Exactly. Some of them are
Speaker 0: they buying the farmland?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Or they're renting it from so a lot of the farmland is owned by certain families.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And they will rent out these these plots of land or whatever little house is already on this land. A way that the Canadian authorities crack down on members of organized crime is not through directly charging them with producing or conspiracy to traffic. They will crack down on their their ownership of a home, and then they they no longer have a place to run operations. So that home gets taken away. It's that particular real estate is under investigation, along with the people, but it it operates a little bit differently, and it it hinders the way that they're able to work.
But mentioning the the law enforcement is even though they know that this is going on, the resources just are not there. And I have a really good source who is with the RCMP, that's Canada's National Police Force, and he specializes in organized crime. And we talk about that one percent of fentanyl number very frequently because, he says, neither my colleagues nor myself believed that number because we have seen so many operations go under the radar, especially when they're working undercover. And I said, well, why isn't there a crackdown then? Why aren't they stopping it?
And why is the Canadian government only implementing a fentanyl czar when Trump is telling them to crackdown, not when thousands of people are dying on a monthly basis from fentanyl use? And he explicitly tells me it's because they just don't have the means to do it. They haven't even been able to crack down on local gangland. How are they now supposed to focus on transnational crime organizations? The head of RCMP was asked just recently, how many organized crime groups, individual organized crime groups, do you think are operating in Canada right now?
And he responds, it's on video. I I don't have a number off the top of my head. I think 4,000.
Speaker 2: How many, to the RCMP, how many people do you estimate are involved in production and distribution of fentanyl in Canada? Do you have, like, a ballpark estimate? Is it a thousand people? Is it 10,000 people? I I don't have a ballpark figure on it.
So you have no idea how many people could possibly be involved in the fentanyl trade in Canada? There's a significant group see, it's a significant number of organized crime group, but if you're asking for a specific number, I I can't give you a specific number. How many organized crime groups are involved? Over 4,000 organized crime groups in Canada as assessed by the Criminal Intelligence Service of
Speaker 3: Canada.
Speaker 2: 4,000 individual organized crime groups all with their own distinct leadership and membership? That's correct.
Speaker 1: And so the question is clarified. There are 4,000 organized crime groups operating in Canada with their own individual leadership and networks, and the head of the RCMP said, yes. I I would say so. Around 4,000.
Speaker 0: Who do you think the key players are putting these putting these labs in up there? Sinaloa cartel? Which cartel?
Speaker 1: It's Sinaloa and CNG. But let me just finish that point about the 4,000 because this goes to show the disconnect between, Canadian law enforcement in Canada because it's actually 668 individual organized crime groups. That's according to CSA's Canadian version of CIA. So imagine if you have this disconnect where our national police force does it is is just pulling out a random number. How are you even supposed to crack down on these people and these groups?
But, yes, it's mostly Sinaloa and CJNG that are in Canada. I would say now it's likely probably just CJNG simply due to the fact that Sinaloa does not have the power the numbers to maintain their stronghold, and they've entered into an alliance with New Generation Cartel.
Speaker 0: Interesting. They made an alliance with them.
Speaker 1: I think it's a proxy alliance. See or the Chapitos were pretty obviously losing the fight in this faction war that's been going on in the Sinaloa cartel since El Mayo was brought to The United States. And so I think CJ and G saw this as an opportunity to say, we will back you up, but we gained control over everything. And they are the first cartel in history to have control over every single Mexican state.
Speaker 0: Interesting. Interesting. You know, back to my head's jumping around a lot. Sorry.
Speaker 1: Sorry. I do that too.
Speaker 0: Back to the back to declaring them terrorist organizations and they're saying, I mean, I totally understand what they're saying. You know, well, we'll just wait four years and everything will be finished. But I mean, there's another aspect too. There's, you know, there's always a potential that we send in SOCOM and JSOC units. I mean, do they have any fear of that?
Speaker 1: I asked them about that, and they said that if American Special Forces lay their feet on Mexican soil, they will fight till the death because they will have nothing to lose. They will put up a fight. Will they win that fight? No. But they won't go down without a fight because that's really that's all they have.
And so if if their entire livelihood and their entire business is being attacked, especially by US uniform operators who have every means to just completely squash it.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: They won't go down like a bitch.
Speaker 0: I mean, down to what level, though? Know what I mean? Mean
Speaker 1: To the very bottom.
Speaker 0: To the very bottom.
Speaker 1: Even even the local drug dealer. Yes. The guy who's a lookout who's making pennies. When I was in Sinaloa covering this fighting in the fall, there was the money flow was interrupted for, you know, all all levels of people working in it with for the cartels. And so, main people who you know, it's like that that necessary job that makes no money are the punteros, the lookouts, the guys on their dirt bikes who watch if if Mexican forces are coming, you know, they they keep their eyes out for whatever is going on.
Those guys make the least amount of money. They're making around $500 a month. And when the infighting began, and all of this money and resources had to go to we need to maintain our stronghold, and we need to buy arms and and stockpile. These were the ones losing out. And so when I was there, once it got dark, I couldn't order, Uber Eats to my hotel because these guys were stealing the food from the delivery men because they didn't even have enough money to eat.
But they were still working for the cartels. They wouldn't say, okay. You know what? Fuck this. I'm gonna go and work in a Walmart where I'm at least gonna make a steady income.
It's not great, but I have something to pay for my basic needs.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: Because at that point, it's not just about the money. It's indoctrination. It's about being a part of something, feeling powerful, feeling like you've been validated and accepted by the very people who are responsible for thousands of deaths and the war on drugs. They're on the FBI's most wanted posters, and I work for that guy.
Speaker 0: I guess it makes sense. I mean
Speaker 1: It makes sense to them. We don't have to understand it.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Wow. I thought there would be at least a little fear, but doesn't sound like they care at all.
Speaker 1: I don't think they do. And based on what I've been told, that's what I was told at the border, whether I go and ask in Sinaloa or Jalisco or Michoacan or Guerrero, the consensus remains the same. And the people in charge are treated like gods. They are absolutely praised as if they are the one and only. I mean, that's why we see all the songs about Mhmm.
El Mencho, El Chapo, El Mayo. And you can literally go to Sinaloa and buy, narco merch. You know, you got the hat with whoever's face on it. You can even buy, like, religious regalia that that is paying homage to narco leaders. Yes.
And so, the people who work for them praise them. People who don't work for them praise them and want to work for them. So, if you're telling this 17 year old kid who has always wanted to be in this lifestyle, You're gonna die for me, and American forces are coming in. He'll stand up. He'll probably shit his pants, but he'll do it.
He'll put on Wow. Face.
Speaker 0: How many of these labs do you think have been set up in Canada? Do you have any estimation on that?
Speaker 1: I think I don't know exactly how many labs are operating Canada, but the majority of the labs that are in Canada, which is significant because there is certainly a supply. There is no lack of drugs in Canada or The United States. Right? And especially in Northern states, too, where a lot of these drugs are coming into. I think the majority of them are being run by the cartels.
And the interesting thing is, you won't really see it in the numbers or in, in police investigations or press releases because they don't keep track of which criminal organizations are operating what, like, labs. Mhmm. So, for example, you will, someone will be arrested. Three three men will be arrested for trafficking, arms, and drugs. They were arrested in a Surrey home in British Columbia, and we found x amount of drugs, X amount of arms, with this amount of street value.
They won't say, Oh, you know, were operating on behalf of of the Sinaloa Cartel. They will say, We found messages in our investigation that they were operating with Mexican associates, and some people will then subsequently be charged, and there'll be Mexican nationals living in Canada. Those guys are working for the cartels. Mhmm. But Canadian authority doesn't keep track, or at least not publicly, of who is working with exactly which criminal organization.
And I think that that also does play a role in allowing the cartels to flourish over there because they can operate so entirely under the radar. I mean, here in in The US, for the first time a few weeks ago, a woman in El Paso was arrested for particularly working as a straw buyer for CJNG. And this was the first case of someone in The US, with material to be charged as an FTO. In Canada, that wouldn't be the case. You wouldn't hear that, oh, she was directly working as an associate with the new generation cartel.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: But when you bring light to that, especially in a border place like El Paso, then everyone who's doing it is kind of on edge. And then they say, okay. Look. Hey. We're under a spotlight.
But if that's not happening, you continue to operate like there's there's no spotlight on us. We don't need to worry because there isn't.
Speaker 0: Do Canadians know this is happening?
Speaker 1: Well, if they read my reporting, they know now. I mean, Kash Patel, director of the FBI, is now saying it publicly. He just said that, they're coming in through the Port Of Vancouver. They're producing fentanyl. The fentanyl is coming from Canada because they haven't secured the northern border.
And when I initially started reporting on this and I was reaching out to RCMP and reaching out to CEISS and and putting out my contact, everyone was telling me, no. You're wrong. This can't be. And RCMP was telling me, we have no evidence to show that local criminal organizations are working directly with cartels. But I met with cartel associates in Canada showing me the production, telling me how they're doing it.
And it goes back to what you asked me. Why are they telling me this? Because they wanna show you exactly how they're operating under the radar. They're so tough. Mhmm.
And, oh, yeah. You secured our southern border? Fuck you. We moved to Canada.
Speaker 0: How much is one of these labs producing? Did you do you know that?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Like okay. So one batch will be, like, a $150,000 worth of fentanyl pills. And how many pills is
Speaker 0: that? Any
Speaker 1: It depends because it depends on the size of the pills. It depends on on on the the strength of of what their the strength of fentanyl in each pill.
Speaker 0: I'm just trying to get an estimation of how much shit is coming through, you know, the Northern US Canadian border. But and then how fast do you think this is spreading? I mean, it sounds like right now it's pretty localized in Vancouver, but when's it gonna go, you know, more towards the other coast?
Speaker 1: It is in the East Coast. It's not at the same level, but it certainly is at the in the East Coast. What I know what's happening for sure in the East Coast is a lot of people are being contracted by the cartels to and not Mexican people. Canadian nationals are being contracted by the cartels to operate as enforcers. A lot of people in Quebec and Ontario
Speaker 0: What do you mean enforcer? What does that mean? It's like a hockey player.
Speaker 1: It's like a
Speaker 0: It protects the hockey team. Right?
Speaker 1: They're protecting the the operations
Speaker 0: so? What are they doing?
Speaker 1: Taking out hits, threatening people, ensuring that the right individuals are being paid off, whether that be enforcement at the border so that guns can get across into Canada from The US, or fentanyl can go the other way.
Speaker 0: How are they getting their people up there? Are they are they coming up through The US Yeah. And just keep going north, or are they flying them in?
Speaker 1: So prior to Canada reimplementing the visa requirement, a lot of the Mexican nationals were flying directly into Canada. They completely would bypass The US. It was much easier that way because they wouldn't need a visa.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: Now it's a little bit different. Now, some of the operatives who were already based in The US are moving into Canada.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And it's interesting because when I was I gained access to a few group chats that were run by the cartels on WhatsApp, Telegram. WhatsApp is, like, the starting point just because of the way the encryption is set up. They don't wanna talk about too much, but because it is so accessible, it's a great way to hire people, recruit people.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And so I gained access to a group chat where they were basically recruiting people to work as enforcers for them, you know, managing certain logistics of the business, whether that's paying off authority, finding out who's who, getting the arms, finding the dealers, contracting straw buyers, whatever it may be. When I was in this group chat, the first thing that stood out to me was two of the phone numbers were Canadian area codes, one was Alberta and one was Toronto. And one of the individuals was directly asked if he could take out a hit if need be. He would be paid $55,000 Canadian. He would have to buy a Glock with three three mags, I think, it was.
I have the screenshot. And there could be no kids around. And if he goes to the house, make sure that no family is around of the individual that needs to be killed. And so for a lot of these people, money was put on the table right away. You get into this group chat, whether that means you're going to be moving fentanyl pills into The US, whether that means you may have to take out a hit, or pay someone off, conducts any sort of logistics, it was, this is how much you'll make.
Take it or leave it. And that was, for a lot of people, that first incentive. Now, for a lot of other folks, it was, I'm gonna be a part of the cartel. I For a lot of these people, they're kind of, outcasts.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And they feel like power. They're, like, an aggressive person. And a lot of those type of guys who kinda had, like, a violent past, boxers, were being hired as cigarios. And the way they would be recruited into these group chats was either through social media. So, a lot of fake postings or postings on Facebook or TikTok that would allude to what they could become a part of, but also also just through, knowing someone,
Speaker 0: word-of-mouth. Interesting.
Speaker 1: Hey, my niece is dating this guy. He's been here from Mexico for around six years. He's making a ton of money. I know you're strapped for cash. Would you if you get a package and you just have to drive it across the border, go to the Sears or Walmart parking lot, someone's gonna pick it up, Don't look inside, and you're gonna get paid $70,000.
Just go and come back. People will do it.
Speaker 0: Damn. And Canada's not doing you you actually, on the outline, I saw that they are also recruiting from the Balkans. Yeah. Did I see that?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Balkan states, Armenian guys too, a lot of ex gang members from over there, and in Australia too. I mean, at this recruiting from Australia?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Really?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Australia, England, like it seems like there's, like, this thing with the Commonwealth places is like
Speaker 0: Why are they going to the I mean, why are it sounds like there's no shortage of people that wanna join the cartels.
Speaker 1: There isn't, though. And that's what
Speaker 0: So why are they recruiting out of Balkans?
Speaker 1: Because they need an international stronghold. And so when you have people who don't look like you, don't talk like you, and come from different training backgrounds, they can fly under the radar a lot better. And they have access to different areas that certain Mexican operatives do not. So, say, for example, not that long ago, there was a blatant daylight shooting in in, Vancouver. A guy was killed.
And he was he was shot by a Canadian man from Quebec. Super French name. This individual had spent years in Mexico and Colombia and was said to eventually work for the cartel, go to Canada, and take out this hit. Now how much better is it that you have a Canadian national taking out a hit? He knows where to go.
He knows how law enforcement operates. He's from this place. He has access. The the chances that there's going to be a fuck up are a lot less. And, also, if you know that Canadian law enforcement is not directly attacking the cartels when when an associate who's not Mexican is operating for them, of course, you're going to have a a foreign person, a Canadian or an Australian or someone from England, take out the hit or commit the crime.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Are they are they trying to spread into Europe and Armenia and Australia as well? I mean, is could that be another reason? Yeah. So they're making connections?
Speaker 1: Yeah. And there are already Interpol reports of particularly CGNG having activity, having strongholds in Australia, in Western Europe, in Kenya. There was a people think I'm crazy when I talk about this, but they found a CG and G linked lab in Kenya, in Africa.
Speaker 0: Wow. What the hell are they doing over there?
Speaker 1: Producing and trafficking. It it's it's an international operation. And to me, it makes sense that they are moving everywhere because it's like what I said to catch me if you can.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, it makes sense to me with the I mean, I I guess it would in Kenya, I mean, I don't know how many people would be able to afford fentanyl, you know, but
Speaker 1: But it's not about domestic distribution.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: It's about that production there and and being so far removed from where the Hawkeye view is, which is Canada, US, and Mexico, and being able to move the product outwards from there.
Speaker 0: You know, the other thing is I'm not saying you're wrong by any means,
Speaker 1: but It's okay. You can.
Speaker 0: To me, it's it it doesn't make sense why they would pay a Canadian 55,000 Canadian dollars to to put a hit out on to assassinate somebody or or fly somebody in from the Balkans or Australia when we do know they don't give a shit about their people dying. You know, I mean, we've seen that for years, you know, they give them five minutes of trading and send them off to their work. Yeah. But, you know, and and so it it's just it's not very cost effective for them to to have to pay that price when they can just send somebody, you know, from a little Pueblo that has nothing into into Canada, US, anywhere they want, you know?
Speaker 1: It's certainly not cost effective, but I think logistically, it works for them. You have a Canadian who's willing to commit these crimes for you on their soil.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: You completely avoid detection of that being the cartel.
Speaker 0: Separate down
Speaker 1: It does.
Speaker 0: Until those people get interrogated. And, I mean
Speaker 1: And they say they've been working with the cartels. And then in the in the RCMP information, they're saying, well, yeah, this person had connections with Mexican criminals.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: But Canadian authority isn't going after those criminals who put out the hit.
Speaker 0: Man, what do you is there any anything that Canada has been doing to combat this at all, or they're just trying to sweep it under the rug?
Speaker 1: I think they're sweeping it under the rug. I think since Trump tried to say, you know, we gotta crack down on the northern border and Kaj Patel has been putting a lot of pressure, they've been doing these sort of public things like, you know, the appointing of fentanyl czar, amping up the amount of border patrol at the northern border. But in terms of really getting to the root of the problem, it's being swept under the rug. And a lot of folks that I've spoken to in Canadian law enforcement agree with that
Speaker 0: notion. Interesting.
Speaker 1: And if I speak to any of my sources that are, you know, part of associates with the cartel operating in Canada, they feel like that it's business as usual.
Speaker 0: Are they infiltrating I mean, how big are they getting into Canada? I mean, like, in The US, we know they're starting to get involved in politics, local police departments. A lot of them are joining the military to get the training and then get out.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's happening yet and because I don't think it's necessary. I think that the way that they've set up shop is working for them, and they're not going to fix something that isn't broken and and risk losing what they have.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1: And it's also important to keep in mind that there is evidence, and, you know, there's all these reports that come out from CSIS about Chinese intervention in Canadian politics and elections. And if the Mexican cartels are already directly working with the Chinese, there's no need for them to to go above them and try to get involved with Canadian politics. That's being done for them.
Speaker 0: Interesting.
Speaker 3: Imagine, you live in this tiny rural town of about a thousand people about an hour outside of Kam Loops, BC. One day, you wake up and there are hundreds of police officers swarming a rural property down your street. That property, you find out, is what police call the biggest, most sophisticated drug lab in Canadian history.
Speaker 5: Like something out of Breaking Bad. It's just incredible. It's overwhelming.
Speaker 6: People were just really stunned.
Speaker 3: The RCMP calls this a super lab, producing an unprecedented amount of illicit drugs. In total, they recovered almost 400 kilos of meth, 54 kilos of fentanyl, that's tens of millions of doses, plus smaller amounts of MDMA and cocaine. And that's just the stuff that was ready waiting to be shipped out. Investigators say this lab had enough source material on hand to potentially triple that output.
Speaker 7: These enforcement actions have undoubtedly saved thousands of lives in Canada. It has also served to deny this transactional crime group an estimated $485,000,000 in profits.
Speaker 3: And this wasn't just about drugs. 400 kilometers away in Surrey BC, they also say they recovered 46 handguns, 21 AR 15 style rifles, 14 submachine guns, at least two fifty caliber rifles capable of shooting through concrete walls, explosives, body armor, and half $1,000,000 in cash.
Speaker 6: When they laid them out, it it did look like, you know, enough firepower to arm a sizable militia, honestly.
Speaker 3: But even all this risks missing the bigger picture because what also shocked investigators was just how elaborate the whole operation was, what it tells them about who might have been involved, and how far reaching this network might just be. Let's go through it. There was one word the RCMP kept using over and over to describe this lab.
Speaker 7: It is extremely sophisticated. Highly sophisticated. Sophisticated.
Speaker 3: So what do they mean by that? Well, here's a look at one of the rooms inside courtesy of the RCMP. We spoke to the head of the team investigating this super lab, and we reached out to two chemists with expertise in illicit drug manufacturing to try and break down what exactly was going on here and what makes this lab so sophisticated.
Speaker 8: This one certainly had the equipment, certainly had the chemicals on hand and the precursors to continue a high level of production.
Speaker 3: Let's start with equipment. Those big green jugs in the back probably caught your eye first. According to the RCMP, they're a type of chemical reactor, literally where ingredients are added and drugs are synthesized.
Speaker 4: So we call them jacketed reactors, meaning that they're sort of a, like, a double wall. Outside that green that's kind of like a coolant system that keeps the reaction controlled in temperature.
Speaker 3: Controlled, by the way, so that it doesn't explode. These are volatile compounds, and this is specialty equipment that you don't just walk into a hardware store and buy. The chemists we spoke to figure per machine the cost could be up to a $100,000.
Speaker 9: They are often made especially for the, the drug producers because they are they are very large size, and they're sort of made to specification, if you like. And so it's a huge amount of investment, huge amount of money.
Speaker 3: Then there's this. Not something police believe is used at all in the mass manufacture of illicit drugs. It looks more like an experimental setup, something you'd see in an R and D lab.
Speaker 8: Is that piece of equipment there that, really gleaned my my attention? It's interesting because that that's a very scientific type of equipment. Typically, we don't see in a drug lab.
Speaker 3: In fact, police in BC tell us they've never seen this in a meth or fentanyl lab before. One possibility they're considering is that criminals were using it to experiment, to come up with new, perhaps more potent types of fentanyl. Health Canada is even taking samples to confirm if that is the case.
Speaker 8: And if it does, it potentially gets us, you know, an advanced notice of of maybe a future trend of drug production or a different method of drug production that that we haven't seen here before.
Speaker 3: Here's another view of the lab from the RCMP, a different room. And this is a chemical minefield. These barrels, they should be chained to the walls so that they don't fall over. According to our experts, they're likely some kind of highly toxic, highly flammable solvent. And these white bags, most likely drug making ingredients so corrosive, you'd get a chemical burn just by touching it.
But consider one other thing, what experts say is the most foundational ingredient, the one you can't make a drug without, and what's called a precursor.
Speaker 4: So a precursor is basically sort of like a building block, of the molecule of the final molecule. So a lot of the precursors are now starting to make it on controlled substance lists on various countries, but it's still these cooks. When they want to cook something, they still find a way.
Speaker 3: The RCMP says they found a significant volume of these precursor chemicals at this lab, about 5,000 liters of liquid precursor and 10 tons of powder, enough to continue to churn out meth and fentanyl for weeks, if not months, without having to restock.
Speaker 7: It's not just, an average citizen that can wake up tomorrow and decide to import quantities of precursors.
Speaker 8: I was surprised to see how much they had and how readily available they were able to access it.
Speaker 3: But it wasn't just the existence or amount of precursor chemicals that startled the RCMP. It looks like they were actually making their own, which is a whole other level of expertise.
Speaker 7: And of particular concern is the discovery of several tons of unregulated chemicals believed to be used to produce p two p.
Speaker 3: P two p is one of those precursors we talked about. It's of the base ingredients used to make meth. It is a heavily controlled substance, and because of that, it's hard to find. It's also hard to make. So finding evidence that this group was manufacturing P2P from scratch, That's like the RCMP cracking an art heist and finding the Mona Lisa.
Speaker 9: You do need to have people who have some chemical knowledge, especially when producing large quantities of chemicals. So you might have what's called a chemical engineer who's been working industry, and he knows what it involves. It could be a very well organized situation.
Speaker 8: As most people know from the TV series or Breaking Bad, that was their their method.
Speaker 3: If you're a Breaking Bad fan, you might remember Walt starts out his meth making career by using pseudoephedrine as a precursor. That's in sinus medicine. This has been the most common route in North America over the past few decades. But a few seasons in, Walt links up with Gus who connects him with a p two p dealer. And it's p two p that lets him suddenly create a much purer product with much better margins.
And I promise I'm going somewhere with this because eventually, him and Jesse link up with the Mexican cartel and find out that they actually make their own p two p.
Speaker 7: They synthesize their own. What? The p two p manufacturing method has been the prior method primary method used by Mexican cartels to produce methamphetamine for years. This brought the level of sophistication of this operation to an unprecedented level, certainly in Western Canada, if not the entire country.
Speaker 3: If we go back inside the BC Superlab, the chemists we spoke to suspect that's what may have been going on inside this room here. You can see the network of metal ducting they installed, which looks like it's meant to channel fumes outside. Making p two p can create some seriously toxic gases. Again, probably not something a low level Canadian gang would try and attempt.
Speaker 6: And so what that suggests and what the RCMP is saying is that, you know, this is a multi international cross border operation with fingers into all sorts of places.
Speaker 3: So the RCMP brought up that suspected connection to the Mexican cartel. They wouldn't go into much more detail about who else might be involved. So we asked someone who used to run the RCMP's Transnational Organized Crime Unit what he thought.
Speaker 5: I think they've gotta have significant, contacts in different parts of the world. I'd be looking at the cartel networks, the Chinese networks, the Iranian networks. But whoever it is, you know, looking at the quantity, that's a corporation. That's not gangs.
Speaker 6: We're hearing more and more people who follow gangs and report on gangs, at least here in BC, that there are these international connections. That the old narrative of these international drug gangs fighting each other is is that it's old. More and more they are cooperating.
Speaker 3: The RCMP was also clear that these drugs, for the most part, were headed for other countries.
Speaker 7: They were destined for abroad, and I can't elaborate quite yet because it's an ongoing investigation, but they were destined for a market abroad.
Speaker 5: If the cartels want to expand and operate to the new markets in the Asian Pacific area, Vancouver has the logistical infrastructure, I e ports, to access this new market, you know, that they haven't really tapped into in the last several decades, I e, Pacific, 3,000,000,000 people.
Speaker 3: Asia Pacific meaning countries like China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand. All to say, everyone we spoke to believes the scale of this operation is immense and something that should give people pause, especially considering only one person has been arrested so far.
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that Catherine Austin Fitts gave testimony in a Dutch court in a sweeping case filed by Peter Stassen, accusing global figures of crimes against humanity tied to pandemic policy. Named defendants include Bill Gates, Mark Rutte, and Albert Bourla. The filing cites suppression of dissent, coercive vaccination, and concealment of long-term health risks, supported by expert testimony.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
💥BREAKING - THIS IS BIG: Catherine Austin Fitts provides bombshell testimony to a court in the Netherlands, who have agreed to hear what may be one of the largest and most important landmark legal cases in recent history. The lawsuit alleges crimes perpetrated worldwide by prominent global figures. *As with @KarlDHarrison and I's landmark Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit, MSM are not covering this, so be sure to repost & share this information widely. "Attorney Peter Stassen has filed a lawsuit alleging that prominent global figures tied to pandemic-era policy and pharmaceutical decision-making committed crimes against humanity. According to court filings, the lawsuit targets what Stassen describes as the architects of “The Great Reset,” naming Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla as defendants. The case asserts that decisions surrounding COVID-19 policy, pharmaceutical deployment, and global coordination resulted in widespread harm. As part of the legal record, Stassen has entered testimony from multiple experts and researchers, including Sasha Latypova, Catherine Austin Fitts, Dr. Joseph Sansone, Dr. Michael Yeadon, and legal analyst Katherine Watt. According to the lawsuit, the testimony presented outlines allegations of systemic misconduct, including the suppression of dissenting scientific views, coercive vaccination strategies, and the alleged concealment of long-term health risks. The filing characterizes these actions as violations of international law, asserting that they rise to the level of crimes against humanity due to the scale and scope of the alleged harm." More information on the case here: https://rechtoprecht.online/ @WoodReporting @ReginaWatteel @NChartierET @DrJBhattacharya @joerogan @joeroganhq @TuckerCarlson @thevivafrei @mario4thenorth @sableandme @Martyupnorth @MarcNixon24 @govt_corrupt @ryangerritsen @rationalposts @KatKanada_TM @FringedCanuck @RealAndyLeeShow @Tammy1Peterson @echipiuk @KEriksenV2 @mferreriptbokaw @ikwilson @CSinclairtv @natalimorris @liz_churchill10 @WiretapMediaCa @vesperdigital @elonmusk
Video Transcript AI Summary
Catherine Austin Fitz testifies before the District Court of Northern Netherlands, stating she is the publisher of the Saleri Report and former partner and board member of Dylann Reid, with prior role as assistant secretary of housing in the first Bush administration. She asserts that the pandemic represented an egregious misuse of healthcare policy to advance economic and political agendas, and she aims to explain the history behind this belief. She describes herself as an expert on the United States federal credit, federal budget, and financial mechanisms, and directs readers to missingmoney.salari.com for information alleging that $21,000,000,000,000 has gone missing from the federal government.
Starting in 1998, Fitz says she became concerned that policy changes led to billions and then trillions of dollars disappearing from federal accounts. She cites a specific moment: the day before 9/11, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Department of Defense was missing $2.3 trillion. She maintains that money continued to disappear, totaling $21 trillion by fiscal 2015. She recounts collaborating with Doctor Mark Skidmore of Michigan State University, who, after contacting her and reviewing federal financial statements, led his students to conduct a survey that increased political and governmental pressure to comply with financial management laws, particularly those requiring audited financial statements.
Fitz contends that from fiscal 1998 to 2015 the federal government refused to obey laws requiring audited financial statements. In 2018, she asserts, the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board issued Statement 56, an administrative policy enabling the federal government to authorize “secret books,” resulting in what she views as essentially no meaningful financial disclosure since then. She references extensive documentation at missingmoney.saliri.com. She argues that balancing the budget and funding retirement systems is critical, warning that without such balance, “the only way they can balance the books is by lowering life expectancy,” a trend she says began in the late 1990s.
Fitz recounts a 1997 meeting with leaders of top pension funds on her advisory board at Hamilton Securities Group, where she proposed reengineering federal finances to deliver wealth and sustain promised boomer-generation retirements. A CalPERS leader allegedly told her, “You don’t understand, it’s too late. They’ve given up on the country. They are moving all the money out starting in the fall.” She interprets a budget decision from 1995 as part of this shift and notes that, after deficits remained unresolved, policies were implemented to lower life expectancy in lower-income groups.
She connects these themes to the 1999–2019 Jackson Hole gatherings and a 2019 plan from the BlackRock Investment Institute, prepared by a group of retired central bankers called the Going Direct Reset. Fitz describes Going Direct as a shift to central bank actions that inject money directly into the system, bypassing traditional reserve channels and buying securities from nondepository institutions. Following the September actions after the Going Direct meeting and the pandemic’s onset, she estimates direct injections of $5–6 trillion, which she asserts would ordinarily cause inflation but were offset by deflationary pandemic effects from lockdowns, which consolidated economic activity among large firms and reduced Main Street vitality. She cites that 35% of small businesses in the U.S. closed, up to 49% in San Francisco, and claims the era created hundreds of new billionaires.
Fitz ties these events to a broader claim of a deliberate reengineering of government and society through health policy used to achieve economic and political ends, supported by misinformation. She urges the court to scrutinize the case for misuse of medical and scientific claims and to uphold the rule of law, arguing that the current trajectory harms populations in Europe and the United States.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank the District Court of Northern Netherlands for the opportunity to address you. My name is Catherine Austin Fitz and I am the publisher of the Saleri Report and I am the former partner and member of the board of Dylann Reid, an investment bank on Wall Street, and the former assistant secretary of housing in the first Bush administration. I wish to give this statement because I believe that the pandemic represented an egregious misuse of healthcare policies to implement economic and political agendas, and I would like to explain the history and background as to why I am convinced that that is so. I'm an expert on The United States federal credit and the federal budget and financial mechanisms. I have a great deal of information about that at my website, including on $21,000,000,000,000 that's gone missing from the federal government.
You can find that at missingmoney.salari.com. Starting in 1998, I became very concerned that a change in policy had changed in the federal government whereby billions and then trillions of dollars was going missing from federal accounts. It started in 10/01/1997, which is the beginning of federal fiscal nineteen ninety eight. Between that time and nineeleven, there was approximately $4,000,000,000,000 missing from the federal government. In fact, the day before nineeleven, the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, gave a press conference and said that the Department of Defense was missing 2,300,000,000,000 and this was a terrible problem.
Money continued to go missing from then on, and as of fiscal two thousand fifteen, there was 21,000,000,000,000 missing. I had been tracking the missing money between fiscal nineteen ninety eight and 2015, and then was speaking about it publicly, and a professor from Michigan State University, Doctor. Mark Skidmore, heard me, contacted me, thought it was unbelievable that this was so, but checked out the federal financial statements. All these numbers are from the financial statements. And proceeded with his students to do a survey, and that survey brought tremendous pressure on the government to obey the financial management laws, particularly the laws requiring audited financial statements.
Between fiscal nineteen ninety eight and 2015, the federal government had refused to obey the laws requiring audited financial statements. As that pressure put more pressure under the federal government to obey, what happened was a policy was adopted in 2018 called Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Statement 56, which essentially was an administrative policy that took the position that they could authorize secret books by the federal government, and we've had essentially no meaningful financial disclosure, in my opinion, since once FASB 56 went into place. Again, tremendous documentation available at missingmoney.saliri.com. It was at that point that I realized, as I had realized all the way along, one of the reasons that I continued to try and publicize and tell people about the missing money and encourage reforms around the missing money is I said, if we don't balance the budget by providing financial resources for the retirement systems, both at the federal and state level, and continue to have this money disappear from the federal government, I called it a financial coup, the only way they can balance the books is by lowering life expectancy. And in fact, that had started to happen.
In the 1997, I was meeting with a leadership of some of the top pension funds who were on one of my advisory boards at my company in Washington called Hamilton Securities Group, and I made a presentation to them about how we could re engineer federal finances in a way that would bring tremendous new wealth to the country and make it possible for the pensions to afford the retirements promised to the boomer generation. Essentially, the boomer generation was a financial pig going through the snake, and the question was, How would we generate enough returns on the pension funds to make it? And a leader, when I presented my plans on how we could reengineer federal spending so that we stopped running huge deficits, the head of the largest pension fund in the country, CalPERS, said to me, he said, You don't understand, it's too late. They've given up on the country. They are moving all the money out starting in the fall.
And I thought he meant, We're reallocating the investments in the pension funds to the emerging markets because the growth rate is bigger. That's not what he meant. He meant, No, we're gonna start moving huge amounts out of the back door of the federal government with the 21,000,000,000,000 that went missing by 2015. And, in fact, if you look at the budget deal where I believe that decision was made in 1995, when he said, They have given up on the country. There was a huge effort by the leadership of the financial system to get the budget on a balanced budget.
When they failed, literally the next month, a series of policies were put in place that started to lower life expectancy in the lower income groups, and that continued. If you look at any chart of life expectancy in The United States versus the other industrialized nations. The top 19 industrial nations other than The US are steadily rising in terms of life expectancy, and starting at that point in 1997, you start to see The United States drop and start to diverge from the other countries, and then when the pandemic hits, it falls off the chart. And I remember sitting in my car, I was running errands in Tennessee and talking to Doctor. Skidmore after our efforts to get real reforms done.
Doctor. Skidmore said, Why don't you just give up? Why do you keep bringing this up? And I said, Mark, don't you understand? If we don't do something here, they're gonna have to lower life expectancy much more than they're doing now, they're gonna have to lower life expectancy in the middle class.
And so when the pandemic happened, I was not surprised. In the 2019, every year the central bankers meet in Jackson Hole, the G7 central bankers, and have various policy discussions. And in 2019, the year after FASB statement 56 was adopted, the central bankers met in Jackson Hole in, as I said, 2019, and they reviewed a plan from the BlackRock Investment Institute prepared by a group of retired central bankers called the going direct reset. Now, we know that the central banking system, every eighty to one hundred and twenty years, does a reset, and often that reset is when you evolve the currency or you move the currency to a different currency. So we know this happens every at some point, you sort of flush the system, and so I assumed when that happened that we were going into a new reset.
The going direct reset, going direct refers to a radical change in policy traditionally when a central bank like the Federal Reserve added money to the system, it would add it by investing in the or or putting money into the reserve track, and then the banks would use that reserve track to then put money in the system. Going direct was the Fed essentially injecting enormous amounts of money directly without going through the reserve track, but buying, among other things, securities from the the nondepository institutions. And what happened starting that September after the going direct meeting, the Federal Reserve with interventions in the market in September, but then with the announcement of the pandemic, injected extraordinary amounts of money into the system. Normally and different estimates are that was $5,000,000,000,000 or $6,000,000,000,000 invested or injected directly. Normally, any injection like that would have extraordinary inflationary impact.
And in fact, there was one former Undersecretary of the Treasury who's speaking with Swiss investors said, you know, enormous inflation is baked into the cake. We just won't feel it right away. And the reason we won't feel it right away, as it turns out, was the pandemic, many of the pandemic sort of actions of locking people down, or calling certain businesses not essential, and leaving other businesses open and some not essential, created an enormous deflationary offset. If you look at what happened in The United States, we basically shut down Main Street, lots of small businesses, left the publicly traded companies open, and shifted enormous market shares out of the small businesses into the big businesses that thus radically consolidating enormous amounts of economic activity. So you inject 5,000,000,000,000, essentially grossly oversimplified into Wall Street, and you shut down Main Street, and then Wall Street has money to go shopping, and Main Street isn't an economic squeeze, the last estimates I saw estimated that 35% of the small businesses in America were shut down.
And and in some places, I think San Francisco was as much as 49%. So it was very, very successful at consolidating economic activity into the big players. One estimate was we, in The United States, we created 500 or maybe it was worldwide, we created 500 new billionaires. So so as I said, looking at this from the viewpoint of what was happening financially around the world, it was pretty clear to me that much of the pandemic was essentially designed to implement the reset and using health policy as an excuse. One of the things I had I had been an investment advisor for ten years and because of that had dealt with many clients who had experienced vaccine injury or neurological damage from vaccines but also various pharmaceuticals.
And so I was very concerned about whether or not the vaccine was safe and effective. We now have many studies proving that it wasn't. That doesn't surprise me. What we certainly have in looking at what's going on in The United States is we have enormous increases in excess death and a continued drop in lowering life expectancy, including in the middle class. It certainly fits with what I expected.
What I would say is that when a society allows this much public policy and healthcare policy to be created based on other economic and political goals and does so terrible lies and propaganda and misinformation, that's not a society that can endure. If we're going to have a civilization based on the rule of law, These kinds of egregious lies being used by essentially oligarchs and billionaires to engineer central control using these techniques, including things that are very, very harmful to people's health, can absolutely not be tolerated. So I would just ask the courts to look at this case and look at the misuse of basically misinformation and disinformation to make cases as to what was appropriate from a medical or scientific standpoint that clearly wasn't in a way that did terrible, terrible harm to people throughout Europe and The United States. I would encourage you to take a very serious look at this because if you look at what was happening economically and politically, it is clear to me that what we are looking at is a reengineering of how our governments work and how our societies work in a way that is not in any of our interests.
Certainly what we want and what we need is the rule of law and we depend on the courts to give that to us. So I would ask that you give this case very serious consideration and again I thank you for the opportunity to address you today and I thank you for your willingness to look at this case.
Home - Stichting Recht Oprecht
De rechtszaak tegen o.a. de Staat der Nederlanden! De stichting Recht Oprecht is om zaken van groot maatschappelijk belang aan de rechter voor te leggen
rechtoprecht.online
reSee.it AI Summary
I received a tip from an industry insider alleging CFIA breached humane slaughter protocols during an ostrich cull in BC, prompting calls for a full investigation into CFIA, RCMP, shooters, and on-site vets. The insider, with 25+ years in slaughter, questions the vet’s role and favors humane methods like calming sacks and captive bolts. They insist other options existed. Post 3 clarifies the insider isn’t a CFIA employee, just industry-connected.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING: Yesterday I received a phone call and an e-mail from an industry insider regarding the the slaughter of the 300+ ostriches in BC. The individual was deeply disgusted and sickened by what they had witnessed, and informed me that similar disgust and outrage was being expressed by many others throughout the industry. In the e-mail below the individual, who has asked to remain anonymous at this time, shares their expert insights as to how CFIA appear to have breached their very own 'humane slaughter practices' protocols. MEDIA: The individual is open to speaking to journalists to provide testimony and further more in-depth expert advice and industry insights. There needs to be a full and thorough deep dive and investigation into the CFIA, RCMP, the shooters and any veterinarians who were on site that allowed this atrocity happen. And why the slaughter was executed in this manner, and who authorised it. The insider told me yesterday that Ostriches are a very difficult animal to slaughter, for a multitude of reasons, and that other much more humane options were available to CFIA, which would have been recommended and presented to them, such as a captive bolt gun. However, for some reason CFIA chose the most barbaric and inhumane way possible to execute the birds. The question is, why? @scoopercooper @WoodReporting @DavidKrayden @brianlilley
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
For those viewing this post on a phone, here is the text from the e-mail: "Good afternoon, Shaun, It has taken me some time to write this message, as I am deeply disturbed by what has taken place during the recent ostrich cull. With over twenty-five years of experience in the slaughterhouse industry and extensive involvement with the CFIA, I must be cautious in how I express my views. However, in all my years in this field and through visits to numerous facilities worldwide, I have never witnessed anything as inhumane or distressing as what occurred in this incident. The claim that a veterinarian was present raises serious questions. The role of an on-site veterinarian is to ensure that animals are slaughtered correctly and with minimal stress - a standard clearly not met in this case. If a veterinarian was indeed present, it would appear their involvement was limited to confirming death rather than overseeing humane slaughter practices. A far more appropriate and humane approach would have been as follows: placing a sack over each bird’s head to calm it, allowing a trained handler to gently lead and control the animal by the neck. Once calm, the ostrich could then be moved into a confined area and euthanized quickly and humanely using a captive bolt gun - a single, well-placed shot to the top of the head resulting in an immediate loss of consciousness. Instead, what appears to have occurred were random gunshots under high stress conditions, which would have caused extreme distress and unnecessary suffering. These animals could and should have been handled professionally, away from the public eye and particularly away from the family and witnesses who were subjected to this traumatic event. That this was not the case reflects a serious lapse in judgment and procedure. There is no doubt in my mind that these animals endured significant suffering, and it is entirely appropriate that the public express outrage over how this situation was handled. Kind regards,"
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@TravelEatPlayDo This individual does not work for CFIA, I clearly stated in my post that they are an industry insider, not a CFIA whistleblower. They have worked closely with CFIA.
reSee.it AI Summary
I have evidence and testimony from insiders deeply disgusted by what the CFIA did. They explained these animals would not have died quickly but would have been panicked, terrified, and suffered horribly from multiple gunshots to kill them... stay tuned, more to come.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
I now have evidence and testimony from industry insiders who were deeply disgusted by what the CFIA did. They explained to me how these animals would most definitely have not died quickly, they would have been panicked, terrified and suffered horribly in pain from the multiple gun shots that would have been required to kill them... stay tuned, more to come.
reSee.it AI Summary
I announce that after nearly 4 years and 15,000 pages of evidence, our Vaccine Travel Mandates case is set to trial. The Federal Court of Appeal will hear our Nov 3, 2025 request to allow Sections 6, 7, 12, and 15 to proceed. We’ve faced motions to strike, but our young lawyer Sam Presvelos has fought hard, exposing Trudeau’s travel ban as coercive. Details and donation options are on our official site.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
IMPORTANT UPDATE - Shaun Rickard and Karl Harrison's Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit - October 22nd, 2025 - @KarlDHarrison After nearly 4 years, the 15,000 pages of evidence – including some extremely damning/incriminating details – is getting closer to Court. Further to the Federal Court ruling that our landmark action can go to trial, the appeal to ensure the whole action can proceed will be heard on November 3rd, 2025 in the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Further to our earlier and full update below from January 9th of this year, we now now move a step closer to the opportunity to fully hold the Liberal government, and Justin Trudeau, to account in court. Their divisive, cruel and unscientific overreach in imposing a nearly 9 months ban on unvaccinated Canadians and Permanent Residents from travelling on planes, trains and ships caused hardship and damage to millions of people in Canada. The hard work of our talented young lawyer, Sam Presvelos, paid off in June 2022 when evidence emerging in discovery in those earlier stages of the case caused then Attorney General David Lametti to reconsider the government’s position and the ‘vaccine mandate for travel’ was suspended with the implicit threat being made that they would do it again if they wanted to do so. In a moment of respite those millions of people, denied their fundamental Section 6 rights for nearly 9 months, could once again travel to see their loved ones and family events; to work; and to take much needed vacation time. This appeal, which will be heard at the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto on November 3rd at 1pm Eastern Time, will consider whether Justice Kent Horne erred when he allowed the government’s motion to strike out two parts of our claim – those parts in relation to s.7 and s.12 of the Charter. Justice Horne allowed those parts in relation to s6 and s15 to go ahead to trial pending the outcome of this appeal and any further appeals that may follow. s.7 (life, liberty, security) deals with crucial rights that permit us all to decide for ourselves what happens to our body. We believe that the choice to accept a vaccine or not should be free of any sort of coercion or detrimental consequences imposed by any authority. They do not accept that the bar to their success in relation to s.7 is so high as to have no reasonable prospect of success and that their arguments should be allowed to proceed to trial. s.12 (cruel/unusual punishment) is normally heard in relation to the cruel and unusual punishment of people in the criminal justice system in relation to penal sanctions. We believe that then Prime Minister Trudeau developed the vaccine mandate as a deliberately cruel and unusual punishment for those Canadians who were exercising their s7 right to refuse the Covid-19 vaccines and, at the same time to use that punishment very publicly as a political campaign promise and ‘wedge issue’ in the 2021 General Election. The appeal will not be easy, but our case is in great hands with Sam Presvelos, the young litigator who achieved so much for millions of people in Canada who were, until June 2022, denied the right to even leave their country! If we succeed the government may then try to further appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. It is very apparent that they do not want this case to be heard and particularly, perhaps, the s.7 arguments. If we are unsuccessful at this stage, they may take their arguments to the Supreme Court. We want to have our arguments and evidence heard on all four Sections 6,7,12 and 15. More details, updates and options available to donate to our legal fund can be found here on our official website: https://www.freedomandjustice.ca/travel-mandates-case/
Travel Mandates Case - The Institute for Freedom and Justice
freedomandjustice.ca
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BIG NEWS! Justice Kent Horne recently ruled that our Vaccine Travel Mandates Lawsuit can proceed to trial. After 3 long & arduous years, our 15,000 pages of damning evidence will finally be heard in a public Federal Court hearing - Please repost this announcement widely. Institute for Freedom & Justice - Our full official press release and all court documents can be reviewed here: https://www.freedomandjustice.ca/travel-mandates-case/ SUMMARY - Trudeau’s Discriminatory Travel Ban Finally Heads To Trial In October of 2021 Prime Minister Justin Trudeau imposed upon Canadians a discriminatory and unscientific requirement to be vaccinated for Covid-19 before being able to board planes, trains or ships travelling within or out of Canada. The restrictions implemented by Trudeau effectively prevented millions of Canadians from moving freely around in their own country and travelling abroad to work or to visit loved ones. Two months later, in December of 2021, Shaun Rickard and Karl Harrison filed an application in the Federal Court to challenge the restrictions imposed by Trudeau. Inspired by Shaun and Karl three other similar applications were filed subsequently by the Hon Brian Peckford (and others), the Hon Maxime Bernier and a courageous young Quebec attorney, Nabil Ben Naoum. All four cases would be managed by Shaun and Karl’s young and brilliant lawyer, Sam Presvelos. Over the next 6 months – including 6 weeks of cross examination of as many as 25 witnesses – there were around 15,000 pages of evidence assembled which showed that the Prime Minister had lied to the Canadian people about his so-called ‘health measures’, which had in fact been imposed only to create a ‘wedge issue’ and to aid his general election campaign in the Summer and Fall of 2021. Faced with the reality of the overwhelming evidence, three of Trudeau’s ministers held a press conference on June 14th 2022 to announce that his travel mandate would be suspended. Immediately afterwards Trudeau’s lawyers filed a motion to strike the legal proceedings on the basis that they were deemed moot. The Federal Court supported Trudeau’s motion and, whilst Shaun and Karl appealed the decision, the Federal Court of Appeal also decided that the matter was moot and that there would be no trial of this matter despite enormous public interest from the Canadian people. Close to 20,000 people attended the hearing via Zoom. Brian Peckford and Maxime Bernier appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which refused to hear their appeals. Shaun and Karl decided instead upon a different strategy, one that they felt had a better chance of a positive outcome. Earlier in the proceedings in the Federal Court in Ottawa, Sam Presvelos had been successful in getting agreement from the Trudeau lawyers that if Shaun and Karl were to file an action for damages, then the government would not oppose use of the large and valuable evidentiary record from the earlier case. In November of 2023 Shaun and Karl filed their claim for damages against the Trudeau government. Preliminary proceedings were protracted, and Trudeau’s lawyers filed a motion, in July 2023, to strike the claim entirely. In November of 2024 Sam Presvelos represented Shaun and Karl in the Federal Court in Toronto to fight the motion to strike the claim. The outcome is perhaps not what Trudeau expected. The case will go to trial! The claim was made in relation to a breach, by the Trudeau government, of the rights afforded to Shaun and Karl under Sections 6(1), 7, 12 and 15 of the Charter of Rights & Freedoms. The Court’s ruling found as follows: Section 6(1) - The claim can proceed to trial for Karl but not for Shaun on the basis that Shaun was not a Canadian citizen, but a permanent resident, when the travel mandate was in place. (Canadian permanent residents are not protected under Section 6(1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.) Section 7 - The claim is struck subject to appeal. (Appeal has been filed) Section 12 - The claim is struck subject to appeal. (Appeal has been filed) Section 15 - The claim can proceed to trial for both Shaun and Karl Therefore, the Federal Court has decided that it will hear the case as to whether mobility rights were infringed and whether so called “unvaccinated” Canadians are in fact a protected group against whom Trudeau discriminated. Shaun and Karl are now pursuing an appeal in relation to the ruling on Sections 7 and 12. Such an appeal is unlikely to be heard for several months. If that appeal is successful then the government lawyers may appeal further to the Supreme Court, and that hearing would take place some months later. There are also political issues to consider. A federal election will take place in 2025 and a new government may likely take a different view of these legal proceedings. It has been a long and arduous journey for Shaun Rickard, Karl Harrison, Sam Presvelos and the thousands of Canadians who were also impacted and who have generously supported the case. This fight for justice is enormously important to millions of Canadians and the eventual outcome, if successful, may shape how future governments in Canada are allowed to impose restrictions in relation to public health concerns, and therefore protect generations to come. The fight ahead may well be long and financially demanding. If you are able to support Shaun and Karl in this final, critical stage of this landmark legal battle against the Trudeau government you can do so by donating to their legal fund through the Institute for Freedom & Justice* here: https://www.freedomandjustice.ca/donate/ *Institute for Freedom & Justice is a registered Canadian charity (#85481 6162 RR0001), therefore a tax receipt can be issued. Media enquiries: info@freedomandjustice.ca
Travel Mandates Case - The Institute for Freedom and Justice
freedomandjustice.ca
Donate - The Institute for Freedom and Justice
freedomandjustice.ca
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@KarlDHarrison More details, updates and options available to donate to our legal fund can be found here on our official website: https://www.freedomandjustice.ca/travel-mandates-case/
Travel Mandates Case - The Institute for Freedom and Justice
freedomandjustice.ca
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@grok, are you able to forward this update to @elonmusk? We'd like to see if Mr. Musk has interest in supporting this landmark lawsuit which will hold the Trudeau/Liberal government to account for their tyrannical overreach & charter violations? Even simply reposting it perhaps?
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@grok @elonmusk @grok, you did not respond to my question above?
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@otsleeel @KarlDHarrison Waiting for links from the FCA... stay tuned
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@KyleTober @KarlDHarrison I'm currently waiting for the FCA to to get back to me with that information, stay tuned.
reSee.it AI Summary
In February 2022 at Blue Mountain Resort, Ontario, security guards assaulted a man with a medical exemption for not wearing a mask, witnessed by his family. The incident sparked over 530 disturbing comments from members of 'Team Canada' on Reddit, showcasing a troubling reaction.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
LEST WE FORGET: February 2022, Blue Mountain Resort, Ontario, Canada, owned by @alterramtnco. When a group of security guards assaulted a man with a medical exemption in front of his wife & kids for not wearing a mask, outside on a ski lift 'Team Canada' morons on full display
Video Transcript AI Summary
This is awesome, this went to a whole new level of entertainment. We got front-row seats for this!
I've been seeing these physical altercations and I'm wondering what the point of security is. There's no reason for anyone to say anything. This just escalated, this guy's gonna go away in cuffs.
Are your feet numb? Mine are molded to the boot, so they feel good.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is awesome. This actually This went this went to a whole level of entertainment, though. Right? This went We got I know. Right?
It's like, what point do the security department We got we got we got front row seats for this. What? We got front row seats for this. I know. Right?
It's like and this is physical. I've been seeing these What what point of the security to have against the I'm I'm thinking about that. Don't know. It's under there's no reason for anybody to say anything. Right?
These guys are it just it just got it just escalated. Right? This guy's gonna go away in cuffs. Are your feet? Like, me too.
Are your feet, like, numb? Oh, yeah. Yeah. My Are they are they they actually they're they're molded to the boot, though. I think they they feel good.
I'm like
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
WARNING - This is disturbing 530+ sickening comments posted by Trudeau's 'Team Canada' members on Reddit directly after the incident https://www.reddit.com/r/ontario/comments/svnnw2/freedom_fighter_removed_from_chairlift_at_blue/?rdt=52980
From the ontario community on Reddit: "Freedom Fighter" removed from chairlift at Blue Mountain
651 votes, 533 comments. 952K subscribers in the ontario community. Welcome to r/Ontario, the largest and oldest online community dedicated to the…
reddit.com
reSee.it AI Summary
I had a phenomenal interview with Tucker Carlson and Russell Brand. We discussed how governments colluded to shut down Russell. It's his first interview since then, and he offers one of the most brilliant explanations of the modern world. Check out the full video and more on the Tucker Carlson Network.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Phenomenal interview with @TuckerCarlson & @rustyrockets "Governments colluded to shut down and destroy Russell Brand. This is his first interview since that happened. Watch it when you get a minute. It’s one of the most brilliant explanations of the modern world you’ll ever hear." Full uncompressed hi-resolution video, transcript and more excellent content can be found on the new Tucker Carlson Network: https://tuckercarlson.com/
Video Transcript AI Summary
In September, media outlets globally labeled me a sex criminal, omitting accusers' names. This was the culmination of a years-long campaign to silence my dissenting views on geopolitical issues, particularly regarding the war in Ukraine. My critiques, initially dismissed as Chinese propaganda, were the target of governments and intelligence agencies. Coda Story, linked to the UK government and CIA, played a key role.
My reporting, which included concerns about Moderna's profits and the handling of the pandemic, led to de-platforming and demonetization. This censorship, orchestrated by my own government, revealed the sham of open discourse in the West. The attack on me demonstrates the vulnerability of even high-profile individuals to these powerful forces. The response confirms the threat I pose, a threat to those in power. The battle continues, and I choose to remain steadfast.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Back in September, media outlets around the world, almost all of them here in the West, in the English speaking world, ran headlines that shocked a lot of readers and viewers. Russell Brand, the movie star, the comedian, now the podcaster, was a sex criminal, a bad man. A sex criminal. Now none of the outlets ran the names of the accusers who had been sexually abused by Russell Brand. That was conspicuously absent.
But the judgment was overwhelming. This is a very bad man, and he needs to be taken out of public view for the sake of the rest of us. What was interesting about this is that, in fact, it was the final scene in a long movie that had been playing out for the preceding couple of years outside of public view. This was an attempt to make Russell Brand shut up. Russell Brand has views that diverge from those of most Western governments on big issues, not small things, big issues, questions of economic policy and war and peace.
And they decided we have to make this man be quiet. Why Russell Brand? Well, because in contrast to a lot of us who give our opinions for a living, Russell Brand had the capacity to win people over from the other side. He hadn't spent a life identified with the far right, just the opposite. Russell Brand was a man of the left, and to most people, a cultural figure.
Everyone knows who Russell Brand is. And so he had the power, the capacity to persuade, and that was the threat. So we thought it'd be interesting to go through in some detail what happened to Russell Brand. None of this has ever been aired before. The censorship campaign against him began with governments, not private organizations, but governments, their intel services and their policy makers.
And as we said, it played out outside public view, and we thought it would be very interesting and important for people to know what exactly happened. And so to find out, we are now joined by Russell Brand himself, and we're grateful to be. Russell Brand, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Tucker, thanks for having me here.
Speaker 0: So, I I I didn't know any I just wanna say I didn't know any of this, and I was I experienced you because I didn't know you as a viewer. And I remember thinking, boy, that is one of the most articulate critiques of the brand new war in Ukraine I had ever seen. I saw one of your videos on the war in Ukraine, and this was in the winter of twenty twenty two, '2 years ago. And you were making kind of a remarkable case, not against the Ukrainian people and certainly not in favor of Russia, but that there might be real implications for the West if we get involved in a war that is not our own. And you you, I thought, said it so well.
What I missed, and I'm now seeing, is that in March of twenty twenty two, you were denounced by an organization connected directly to the US government as an agent of Chinese propaganda for your views on Ukraine. So let me just ask you your experience of this. Did you know that you were being attacked as a Chinese propagandist for your views on Ukraine?
Speaker 1: I actually didn't and still at this point struggle in to see entirely what the connections are between those two issues and how I would develop and cult and cultivate a strong affinity with China. I've never been to China. I don't purport to understand China. Yes. Certainly don't advocate for Chinese policy.
I've just got relatively superficial dilettantes knowledge of geopolitical matters in the South Asian cities. It's not something that I would like to tie my colors to the mask for or be willing to be publicly shamed, attacked, and even jailed for. So, it happened, though.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And and a lot happens on the Internet that we miss. But these in my reading of it is and we haven't, by the way, talked about this off air, but my reading of it is that these were the early seeds of a very deceptive plant that flowered more than a year later in September when you were accused of these crimes, and demonetizing and censored as a result of that. But looking back, so you were accused by a group called Coda Story. It published a story on its anti disinformation newsletter.
Now Coda Story is connected to the UK government, but it's also connected to the CIA. How does it make you feel to know that you were in the crosshairs of two of the most powerful governments in the world and their intel agencies?
Speaker 1: It seems to be ridiculously grandiose to even imagine that I would stir and arouse the interests of such powerful agencies and groups that the British government, if indirectly, would spend considerable sums on observing and de amplifying content. That true information shared through our platforms in the period of the pandemic was censored, was cited as high risk. That companies like Moderna had spent considerable revenue tracking our content and, again, de amplifying it. That Dame Caroline Dionich, whose husband is a psy ops expert that worked abroad in terrorism before deploying those methods and techniques and, to some degree, those teams to observe what they call disinformation and misinformation in The UK. I recognize that the new emergent media spaces present a lot of possibilities even with your kind compliments about our reporting on the Ukraine.
All we've essentially done is listen to brilliant academics talking about the history of NATO and the coup in twenty fourteen in Ukraine and Putin's explicit declaration that he would prefer, let's put it mildly, that Ukraine were not invited into NATO. The some of the regional disputes, how they're escalating tensions. This is information that because of independent media is available. And perhaps the function that we, our media organization have fulfilled is being to collate that information and convey it directly in an accessible manner to give people an alternative perspective than to the homogenized mainstream opinion Yes. Which amounts to, I've learned over the last few years, the amplification and normalization of the agenda of the powerful.
That no opinions can be allowed into that space. And I'm astonished by how jealously it is guarded. There are points in my life where my personal self regard would have loved the idea that I would be considered important enough to attack on this scale, to spend this amount of revenue and resources on. But I'm now seeing that independent media itself is an extraordinary threat. That independent media inevitably leads thought.
And we appear to be at some precipitous moment of radical transition. I'm not sure and I'm not sure if anybody could be sure of where this is all heading, what the exact teleology is. But it seems to be to do with mass centralization, globalization, significant attempts to control the information space that are so rigorously adhered to and protected that even what you might imagine to be a marginal voice is considered a significant enough threat to warrant coordinated media attacks expenditure on peculiar clandestine nongovernment organizations and think tanks that take their money from the military industrial complex from the legacy media, who, by the way, when they're critiquing independent media, they got skin in the game. They're not able to independently assess your work or my work or the medical opinions of Joe Rogan. They have a vested interest in destroying those organizations.
In the last few years, I've learned about the Trusted News Initiative, which has extraordinary connections again to big pharma and sets of interest around the reporting on war that decided and determined that they are no longer competing with one another. You, in particular, come from a journalistic background where it would have been commonplace for the great institutions of American media to compete with one another for scoops, the New York Times versus the those days are gone. It explicitly states on the Trusted News Initiative website, we are no longer in competition with one another. We have to curtail and stamp out. I think it even uses the word choke independent media.
And it's clear that there are now sets of globalist organizations funded by government, but also corporations that are making deliberate, profound attempts to shut down any dissent in an astonishingly aggressive way. And to be sort of caught up in it is, terrifying on one level. Absolutely terrifying, particularly due to the nature of allegations I faced. But also revealing, more importantly, it's revealing about the way the the way that I believe the world and in particular this space will be affected and the way these events will continue to unfold in the coming years. What I
Speaker 0: love about your critique is that you're coming to all of this pretty cold since you had a midlife career change. You you're doing something very different from what you did fifteen years ago. And I'm wondering if your assumptions haven't been completely blown up. You're you're a British citizen, lived in the country your wife. How strange is it to know that your tax dollars are being used against you by your government, which they are, and how bewildering is it to find that the open contest of ideas that we were promised
Speaker 1: here in the West, may the
Speaker 0: best idea win, is a sham?
Speaker 1: Yes. It's a well, I suppose I went into the entertainment industry really with the giddy trajectory that propels a lot of people into those spaces, believing that there might be some fulfillment and certainly there would be excitement. And when I was a denizen of that world, I was fostered and adored and celebrated and facilitated and lived the kind of lifestyle which I think is kind of common for people in that area, for single people, in my case, drug and alcohol free, but certainly with, an appetite for a promiscuous lifestyle. When I was part of it, I found it empty and unfulfilling, of course, as it would be as anyone who's had those kind of experiences ultimately realizes. When I departed it as a result really of various spiritual crises or commercial failures or a combination of those events, I really felt like a coming home to the type of values that I grew up with.
I grew up in a normal blue collar town, gray. It's kind of like a place that's like New Jersey, I guess. Kind of suburban, outside of the city, normal people, good values kind of place. And what I feel like happened is like, well, since I've had a family, since you know, I've got a young son, I've got a couple of daughters, is I feel like that I was able to deploy entertainment as a man in recovery in a new space. And what simply began with myself and my partners is tell the truth about things you care about.
Kind of over time, it began to I suppose it's Glenn Greenwald the other day. He goes, you know, you shouldn't be surprised that if you attack the most powerful interests in the world, the deep state, powerful corporations, the machinery of war, that you yourself are the recipient of attacks. Why does that why is that surprising to you? I know. I know.
But because sometimes it does feels speculative, doesn't it? You're talking about these really powerful organizations and the way that it's funded and the way that it crosses over and their malfeasance and underhanded insidious activity. And then as it starts to become more popular, as more and more people realize that it's actually true, as more and more people become willing to take back control in their own lives, as more and more people refuse to consent to being treated in this sort of infantile way, having their autonomy and personal and mental and spiritual freedom undermined, their connection to their land undermined, their connection to nature, avoided. You start to realize that you're actually operating in quite territory. But while power is very serious and it has to work very hard to maintain its grip.
So these organizations it is something does it surprise me to find that the British government through the Department of Culture and Media and Sport, the very person, the very people that sponsored the new rather draconian online safety bill personally contacted, the height of these, allegations and attacks on me that contacted social media platforms and asked if I would be demonetized. But they're the body that regulates them. They have the ability to find those organizations. They're the the very person who is sponsoring the online security of it.
Speaker 0: For saying just Yeah.
Speaker 1: Of course.
Speaker 0: I understand what you're saying. So these accusations appeared. There were I don't know if this has changed, but at the time, there were no names attached at all. You were accused anonymously of committing crimes. And then your own government, which you pay for Yes.
Reached out without telling you to online service providers and media organizations and said, please kick him off and censor him and take his money away. That's is that what you're saying? Yeah. That's right. Any kind of trial, before any proof that you were guilty, before any names were attached.
Yeah. That that happened.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And it's the same people that are sponsoring online safety bills, which amount to facilitating further censorship.
Speaker 0: But what a betrayal by your own government.
Speaker 1: Well, it's astonishing if you regard your government to be in a position of service rather than a a position of domination and control. But what's become apparent in recent years is what the nature of our relationship with with government is. That they are there to rule and control and dominate. And whilst they may now do it with an aesthetic of care and with the language of inclusivity, I believe the threat of authoritarianism is far, far greater from those that use the language of liberalism than these emergent, somewhat nationalistically oriented populist movements present because they are leveraging that power now. They're interested in censorship.
They're militarizing the police force. They're introducing protest laws. They're introducing censorship laws. Through their actions, we can observe them. Through their fruits, can we know them?
We could see what they and if you try to dissent, if you try to oppose even what I consider to be a relatively marginal scale, then the consequences are severe and immediate and robust and terrifying.
Speaker 0: It I I think what makes your specific case so compelling is that if they could do it to you, a person who had the admiration of a lot of people aren't interested in politics and was pretty famous and had some means, etcetera, then the average person stands no chance against these forces. So with that, let if you don't mind, can we get specific about a couple of Yeah. That you mentioned? The first is Moderna, which is a drug company as part of Big Pharma. Tell us how you intersected with pharma and what you with Moderna and what you think they did to you.
Speaker 1: During the pandemic period, we reported continually about some of the clinical trials that Moderna conducted and whether or not they ought be deemed sufficiently rigorous to warrant the level of measures that were being implemented, if not entirely mandated. We talked about a government official called Jonathan Van Tam, who was the public face of the government saying, you know, we should be taking vaccines, recommending that the measures escalate. Jonathan Van Tam subsequently took a position at Moderna. We reported on that. People within the FDA took positions at Moderna.
We reported on that. We accurately reported that both Pfizer and Moderna were making a thousand dollars, like a second or a minute. Just like we reported a lot we reported accurately and thoroughly about the degree to which big pharma were profiting from a situation in which Albert Bourla explicitly said it would be inhumane to profit from this global crisis. This meant that we were tracked by agencies employed by Moderna. They had, like us, on a high risk category.
This is the reporting of Li Fang from on his Substack, not just me, Jay Bhattacharya, Michael Shellenberger, Alex Berenson, a number of what you might call anti pandemic measures voices or strong critics of the way that the pandemic unfolded were under observation from by agencies that were either funded by big pharma, sometimes the government. And in a sense, what I've started to realize, Tucker, is this cartilage between the state and the corporate world is often provided by these unusual organizations that are claiming to be observing disinformation or monitoring, but they're actually crushing dissent. That's what they're doing in practice. Dissenting voices are being aggressively crushed by almost any means necessary. The media organizations are collaborated in a a way that is unprecedented in order to shut down dissenting voices.
And it it appears to me that this is part of something I don't know that we've seen anything like this before.
Speaker 0: So what you're saying is that these organizations which purport to be independent are not actually independent from government. They merely give government, the politicians and the intel agencies, especially some some plausible deniability, some distance
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: From what they're doing. Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 1: I'm saying that, Tucker. That seems to be the function. There's a group called Logically, and Logically have received millions of pounds of taxpayer money. And what they do is observe dissenting voices around, in particular, COVID and pandemic measures. But they are now working in The United States, apparently, in order to regard misinformation around election campaigning.
It seems that that that this group received government money in order to control online spaces. So if
Speaker 0: you're worried about the security of electronic voting machines or absentee ballots
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Who are denounced by these people and
Speaker 1: Yeah. Censored by them. That's that's precisely how it works. And, of course, they employ former FBI, agents, CIA agents. In a way, I suppose, what happened during the pandemic period because of, like, the Twitter files, for example, we started to learn the degree to which the deep state were involved in the in social media companies, the degree to which they were censoring and shutting down information, information that we now know to be true, which it was you know, of course, you'll be aware that Mark Zuckerberg said we did censor true information.
The category, in fact, of malinformation is information that's true but but harmful to the agenda of the powerful. Well, it seems like groups like Logically and the Public Good Project are specifically empowered to control, censor, de amplify information that is harmful to that agenda. This seems totalitarian. Yeah. To control
Speaker 0: what people are allowed to to think is I think that's the definition of it.
Speaker 1: What I've started to I suppose that's what in essence, what I've started to feel and report on consistently as you noted at the beginning of this, I'm not someone who's affiliated organically with conservatism or what you might regard as right wing politics. Although I, of course, recognize the legitimacy of a whole variety of political views and the right of people to hold different views Yes. From one another. But it seems to me that authoritarianism now is being deliberately veiled in a the insidious language of care, concerns, safety, and convenience. It seems to me that we are in a time where we lurch from one crisis to another, that the crisis is always used to legitimize certain solutions, and a docile or terrified public is willing to participate in this proposed solutions that usually involve giving up their freedom.
We are continually being invited to give up our freedom in exchange for safety or convenience. And it seems that this process is radically escalating. And I feel that this is something that we will see yet more of in the coming year. I I feel like, you know, you've spoken publicly about this, that we're potentially on the precipice of serious, and to use your term, a hot war with Russia. And that's being reported on in my country right now.
It's like we're being prepped, groomed, primed for war is coming. That we're being kept in a state of constant anxiety in order to induce compliance. But the ongoing stoking of cultural tension is to ensure that people don't begin to recognize that actually we have far more in common with one another than we do with these curious sets of establishment interests that seem to be transcendent of national democracy. To to be explicit, I'm talking about organizations like the WHO, NATO, the WF, and their astonishing influence. Added to that, the types of groups we've discussed already that have been exposed due to Li Fang's reporting, these think tanks and apparently independent organizations who are not independent when you look at where they get their money, big pharma or the government or the military industrial complex or the kind of people they employ.
People from deep state agencies such as the FBI and CIA that have extraordinary affinity with the legacy media and their ongoing agenda. So what I suppose I'm sensing is that totalitarianism now will not bear the inflections or aesthetics of the twentieth century militarism. Guys in medals with mustaches thumping their fist on a desk will be calmly told what with by gentlemen with beautifully coiffured hair or elegantly speaking ladies that just for our safety and just for our convenience, we will be returning to our homes. And anyone that has an audience or a base or an ability to communicate with people to disrupt those types of narratives will be identified and destroyed.
Speaker 0: Well, there's certainly, they've identified you and they're trying to destroy you in the most obvious way, in a way that hurts not just you but your family. Was there ever a moment when this happened in September where you thought, you know, it's just kinda not worth it to be doing what I'm doing? This is so painful and so threatening to my family that maybe I just bow out and stop talking.
Speaker 1: My son was born with with a heart condition. And while this was happening, he was undergoing heart surgery. He he was 12 old. And I suppose what that did, Tucker, is it revealed that that what we were experiencing was a public concoction. I am aware that I put myself in an extremely vulnerable position by being very very promiscuous.
That is not the kind of conduct that I endorse and it's certainly not how I would live now. But I I've been shown a good many things as a result of these events. The value of my family. The value of friendship. The value of being able to speak publicly.
I mentioned my son because throughout it, I saw I was able to maintain what is really important in life. And as you have actually said, we all know how this ends. Attacks like this, a crisis like this, hurtful though it is to be accused of what I consider to be the most appalling crimes, to be accused of this is very very painful and very hurtful. But I am being shown that there is a con there are consequences for the rather foolish way that I lived in the past. Although, of course, again, to reiterate due to the nature of the world we live in, of course, I deny deny any allegations of the kind that have been advanced.
But what I've seen is the significance of family, the importance of having values that are transcendent of this, the importance of God. Yeah. It's very easy to talk about God. I talk about God all the time. But when you need God, it's not when the outside world shows you the the the reality of your powerlessness.
This is this can just happen. This can be undone. This can be unspooled at you. And with our boy and to be in environments as you understandably and obviously are when you have a sick child, you're in environments with other people that are in the exact same position.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And you are shown what is real and you are shown what is truthful and you are invited to look at life very differently. So there are many things that I am grateful for as a matter of fact, even though it's not a situation that I welcome and it's a as I say, these are allegations that I object to in the strongest possible terms. The fact that it happened concurrently while I had the opportunity to see the strength and dignity of my wife and the strength and dignity of my wife and the beauty of my little son and the reality of the people that in this world that care for sick children, that perform heart surgery on tiny babies, shows me that, oh, they're look at all of these realities. How can you live in the ridiculousness of their version of events? I couldn't have you live in the ridiculousness of their version of events?
I couldn't have been more open and public about the way that I lived when I was younger. I was periscuous. If anyone wanted to have sex with me, I'd have sex with them. I publicly announced it at the beginning of all shows. The idea that that was a some sort of a smokescreen for criminal conduct is absurd, but I recognize now that unless you're willing to be a participant in these systems of compliance and distraction, then you you pose some kind of evident threat.
Speaker 0: A big threat.
Speaker 1: A big threat.
Speaker 0: I mean, obviously, the response proves the power of the threat that you posed and still do. But, again, just to quickly back to my question, because this was so intense and it happened as your son was born and under undergoing the surgery, did it ever cross your mind like, this I clearly have hit the third rail, and I'm out. I've seen that happen a number of times.
Speaker 1: Have
Speaker 0: you? Yes. I have. And, yes, with well known people. And but you didn't do that.
And here you are. You clearly thought about it, and you've decided that you're gonna continue forward. Was that a hard decision?
Speaker 1: Do you sometimes think that there is no choice? You have no choice. Yeah. Did you ever really have
Speaker 0: Yes. I do feel that way, strongly.
Speaker 1: There is no choice. We have no choice. Something strange is happening. Something ulterior is moving. Something very important is happening.
I'm I don't I'm not proposing to be a person that lacks self interest. I'm not I feel fear. I feel anxiety. I'm a recovering drug addict. I like you know you know what that kind of psychological baggage that comes with.
But I feel like, what is the purpose here? What are we doing here? I've been shown to get I've, in a way, lived a pretty amazing life. I've, like, grew up in a normal background. I've got super famous.
I experienced all of that giddiness, all of that hedonism, found it empty and hollow, and have been returned to a position where people could actually be connected. I actually been incredibly optimistic because of things like the ongoing agricultural protests around the world, the trucker protests, the the lengths that people will go to to criminalize not just an individual like me, but whole movements will be criminalized as far right as Nazis, right, as whatever language is required to rejection of this global authoritarianism is what will be deployed. So, when I say, no, I didn't think for a second about doing anything different. You know, I didn't think that. I don't think like that.
And it's not out of bravery. It's out of it's something beyond that because I think, you know, sometimes I would like to just be with my little daughters and my wife and my son and just live peacefully. But I don't know, Tucker. It doesn't seem like there's a choice.
Speaker 0: There isn't a choice. There isn't a choice. But, you know, even under those circumstances, some choose cowardice. And, again, I've certainly seen that quite a bit. Dynage.
You mentioned a person called Dynage. Can you explain, what you mean by that, who this person is, and what role she plays in what has happened to you?
Speaker 1: When you become accustomed to dealing with American politics, it's huge sums of money. It's powerful agencies that you see depicted in Hollywood movies, characters played by great movie stars. And so when you return your gaze to British politics, you feel like you're dealing with some sort of drudgery, some sort of, like, some, like, ludicrous heritage porn. Who are all these dames and baronesses entitled individuals? They can't be doing anything serious.
Someone called Dame Caroline Dynige, who sounds like a Downton Abbey regular. But actually, though, Dame Caroline Dynige put forward the online safety bill. She's married to a dude that does, that that does military psy ops and now uses those very psy ops in this in in with the domestic population. She's the person that got in touch with the social media platforms demanding that I be demonetized, they seem to have an extraordinary agenda. Like, what the time
Speaker 0: Can I just ask you something? Yeah. I looked up because I'm not as familiar with your politics as I should be.
Speaker 1: Yes. I
Speaker 0: looked her up, and, I think what I was so struck by was that she's a member of the Conservative Party. Right. And that suggested to me that there isn't a choice in British politics. There's really just one party.
Speaker 1: Of course. Yeah. Absolutely. It's a uni party.
Speaker 0: They're not even pretending at this point.
Speaker 1: They're not really pretending. Like, here's a sort of an an extraordinary thing that appears to be playing out. In addition to just being casually informed by the legacy media that we're on the precipice of war with Russia and that conscription might be reintroduced in '24. But there was a part there was a COVID inquiry in our country, which, by the way, I don't imagine for a second would have happened without independent media reporting without voices like Jay Bhattacharya Yeah. Who was shut down, or voices like Michael Shellenberger or Berenson, people that have been shut down and vilified at large and extensively.
The COVID inquiries already cost a hundred and 40 5 million pounds. It's been booted off and delayed indefinitely, but at least until after the general election. Like many countries, there's an election in our country this year. But as usual, it's between two neoliberal, what you might term centrist parties that are ultimately dominated and controlled by the same concerns where an extraordinary focus is spent on the tiny minute differences. But it's the party nominally of the left is ultimately a centralist neoliberal party.
The party nominally of the right is a neoliberal centralist party. They may quibble about some issues that seem significant, and certainly those issues are stoked and amplified. But neither party will say we are going to have a thorough investigation into what went on in that pandemic. That clearly was a lab leak. It looks like it was a bioweapon.
It's been concealed. The people that we entrusted with our response to that pandemic are likely explicitly linked to the leak in its in the first instance. These kind of stories are never told. There are no the legacy media organizations that worked in conjunction with one another to attack me evidently and by their own reckoning over a series of years, they are not conducting investigations into Epstein Island. They're not conducting investigations into the the nature of the pandemic, how it was funded, where the money went, where it came from, the efficacy of lockdowns.
Where are these investigations?
Speaker 0: Even the the fabled Times of London?
Speaker 1: The fabled Times of London.
Speaker 0: Such garbage. So there's nobody in and pardon my ignorance. I'm I'm I'm peering in from the outside, but there there really isn't any big media organization in your country that's even trying to answer the question, what was that? Where'd this virus come from? No one's doing that.
Speaker 1: Do you know one of the things that I find terrifying about becoming more educated about this space, Tucker, mostly by listening to, more educated voices than my own is that many of the things a person might instinctively feel such as you feel like, you know, yourself, forgive my ignorance. I don't know much about British politics. But the way that one might intuit, hey. Should we not be provoking Russia into a war? Don't they have nuclear weapons?
Should we think very carefully about that? I mean, how much do we want Ukraine in NATO? And do we even need NATO anyway? The kind of things you might think if you didn't go to university. If you're a regular blue collar person working for a living, maybe in the police force or the fire service or as a nurse or as a teacher, something that gives real value to your nation.
The kind of things you might think, They're true. Those ideas are true. And in order to prevent you from reaching those ordinary everyday regulations, a machine is put to constant work to conquer the space of your attention. Incessantly and relentlessly filling your mind with dumb ideas and dumb distractions making you believe that's a a some sugar or a screen might be a convenient palliative as your children are marched off into an unwinnable forever war. You know, like like, do you know, like the I saw we've been thinking lately before, you know, like with the hoofies and stuff, like and, like, I I'm being deliberately glib.
But it's like you go from not ever having heard the word hoofie to being invited to hate the hoofies. Oh, the hoofies. We gotta hate the hoofies now. And you really like, you know, just to move a battleship in to that region. Think of the taxpayer dollars.
And it's not as if the pen they're gonna gonna be passing an audit anytime soon and telling you where this money is actually going. And $2,000,000,000,000 was spent on Afghanistan. And if you think of the before and after picture of Afghan Oh, well, thank God we spent that $2,000,000,000,000 because before Afghanistan was and now Afghanistan is it's very difficult to fill in those sentences, isn't it? And like so what I'm saying is is like your sort of easy dismissiveness of what British politics amounts to is probably right. Two corrupt parties pursuing the same ulmer end.
Keep people tyrannized. Keep people distracted. Keep them turned on one another over minor issues that will not ultimately affect their lives or the lives of their children so that the agenda of the powerful can be pursued without opposition?
Speaker 0: War, the economy, public health Mhmm. Food supply CS. Water supply. I mean, these are the energy. These are the things that matter, and they're the things that are are never discussed openly, ever.
Speaker 1: Why can't we have conversations about that? Like, sort of with the the global farming protest, it's not accurately reported on. When it is, it's reported on with a particular accent and with the always with the insinuation that farmers have suddenly moved their attention from the raising of crops to racism now. The farming's more of a hobby. I've got to return to my true love that's having strong views about varying ethnicity.
There's no question that a rise in, nationalism is an understandable response to rampant globalism, but the ongoing sort of finger pointing and condemnation of ordinary people I identify with, I recognize it because I grew up in those communities. Professional metropolitan people don't like working class people, don't like ordinary people, and now they found a way to legitimize their hatred. Oh, they're all disgusting. They're all racist. Look at them in their MAGA hats.
Look at them with their white vans and their flags. Look at them with their perspectives, with their unearned views and their belches and their beer. It's a kind of legitimization of a loathing of the people that are most connected to the nation. People that, generally speaking, a couple of generations ago were asked to sacrifice the lives of their sons and daughters for the for the idea of nation, an idea that they're now being told doesn't exist. For me, what we need to see is an emergence of a different type of populism that transcends the boundaries of left and right.
These things are happening organically and naturally anyway. And what I think is happening is that perhaps it's odd, isn't it? Because the Internet is ultimately a creation of the military. Clearly, they didn't accurately understand that whilst it was going to be a brilliant means for control, and clearly that's one of the wars that's being fought now, it is also a tool for informing and awakening. And I think that we're at this crux point.
Which way is it gonna go? Are people going to wake up to the reality that we are being confronted with? Or are we going to sort of nervously cling on to the idea that somehow through comfort and panaceas, we might hold on to some old life? Increasingly, I think, is over. I watched some of that speech you did in, Ottawa or wherever you were in Edmonton, Canada.
And two of the things I thought were important is knowing that you are not God. You are not God. You are it's not about you. You have to have some purpose in your life. And secondly, people must relearn a connection to their land.
Our connection to our lands has been broken. Now many countries, particularly in a post colonial world, have complex relationships with their land. Sometimes that is a relationship with a land that had inhabitants prior to the our our arrival or the arrival at least of settlers in your country, for example, or in Canada that you were describing outlining. But we are divorced from nature. We are divorced from our lands.
We are divorced from one another, and and we are fed such an empty, hollow, vapid, phatic diet of lies. And I you said at one point, oh, you should you know, this is this vast country. You could all have six six acres each. Yes. And I felt like, oh, the crowd responding to that.
People are frightened of the people of Britain or the people of America or the people of Canada or Australia or people all over the world. For surely, those farmer protests are happening in Sri Lanka. They're happening in India. They're not just happening in Europe or angliphonic countries. They're happening everywhere.
They're happening everywhere. And I feel that what's that's precisely the direction we need to return to. Sovereignty of the individual. Sovereignty and sanctity of the connection between people and their land. Maximum amount of power in your own life and the life of your community and and your loved ones.
Not this transition of power to increasingly centralized forces and this, infantilization and neutralization and castration of individual and familial power.
Speaker 0: Can I ask you a question that you may be able to answer that I've been meditating?
Speaker 1: Oh, give it a go, Tucker. I'll tell you that.
Speaker 0: Well, you're just uniquely positioned to answer it because you've seen both sides. But, so the things that the people in charge hate include nature Yes. And the class of people who are most useful to your nation. You describe them. Cops, firemen, teachers, nurses, all of them are crushed during COVID, by the way
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: And farmers. And it's indisputable that if you don't have those people, you don't have a society. You could get rid of every think tank and every sociology department and every liberal arts university, and you'd probably be okay. Get rid of your farmers, you starve to death. So it's not obvious why the leadership of a country would hate the very people they need most and hate the most beautiful and valuable thing they have, which is nature.
Why do they hate those things?
Speaker 1: It terrifies me to contemplate, Tucker, that people like Alex Jones and in our country, David Icke, who aside from some views that are impossible to corroborate around quite occultist and shall we call them marginal ideas, difficult to corroborate Yeah. Ideas. When it comes to the subject of globalization and the increasing authoritarianization of our planet appear to have been ahead of the curve. You can see them twenty, thirty years ago saying with the empowerment of NATO, the empowerment of World Banks and the WHO, like this it's extraordinary. And it seems to me that the disempowerment of ordinary people, the condemnation, demoralization of the public to create people that just are weary and broken and is if not enslaved then so dependent it amounts to a form of slavery cannot be inadvertent.
It seems to be a denial of something fundamental that I, in my language, I would call spirit. The the right to be who you are, but there isn't something fundamentally ugly or wrong with you, that you are allowed to be who you are. And I see that as a universal principle that will be applied all the way from the left to the right across various ways that people claim their individual identity now. It seems to me that, yes, that if you start to attack those pivotal infrastructural roles I was struck when speaking to some of the people that you work with, man, as you know, that's been a cop for twenty six years in New Jersey, thirty five years in the security first services. But these people that give their lives for a country.
So to tell those people that your country doesn't mean anything or to alter the meaning of what a nation is or alter what your contribution has been, it seems to be about a kind of disorientation. And it's difficult actually sometimes. The reason I mentioned at the beginning of this rather coroning answer figures that are broadly condemned as conspiracy theories, but then aren't we all these days? Is it the reason I mentioned them is because they talk specifically about ideas to do with spirituality, morality, and ethics. And it's hard for someone like me to consider that the goals of this global establishment are anything other than power, finance, dominion.
But when you talk about this loathing of nature, whether that's human nature or botany or the great expanse, it's difficult to think that there isn't something dark. Yes. At its core.
Speaker 0: Because there's no rational explanation for that. How could you want to despoil nature? How could you hate human nature? How could you want to hurt people? There those are not rational responses to anything.
I mean, there's gotta be I mean, clearly, what we're watching are the fruits of spiritual war. I'd if you're gonna give a better explanation, let me know.
Speaker 1: Certainly, the solution seems to me to be spiritual. And even when they're talking about ecology and evoking words like Gaia, like the spirit of the planet, it seems oddly utilitarian. The Earth is a resource even when claiming to care about the types of energy industry that might be most beneficial and those which might not be as beneficial. I don't see reverence. I don't see an acknowledgment of the sacredness of the earth.
That the that the Earth is not a resource. It's not, you know, obviously, the left and right are classically almost at this point divided around the subject of climate change. And what I feel is, who or who among us or not love our planet and behave respectfully and reverentially and lovingly to our planet? And how is that gonna happen if no one has a relationship with it? I think like 90% of in my country, 90% of the land is inaccessible to most people.
90% of the land is privately owned. Like land that used to be commonly held is now all privately owned. There has been successive law after successive law that has moved power and control and the land and nature herself into the hands of an elite. And is this, I suppose, even where it would have been risible that So
Speaker 0: you're getting back to feudalism?
Speaker 1: Yeah. What you're saying? Let's get back to good old what was wrong with feudalism? Why are we making such a fuss about it? It's like the idea that you and I are people that operate on different sides of a political spectrum becomes exposed as ridiculous when the anti authoritarian aspect of what we both clearly believe in has to become the clear and pivotal point around which all political views have to now start to coalesce.
You you are either going to oppose what's happening when it comes to globalization and centralized authoritarianism, or you are going to be crushed by it individually and collectively.
Speaker 0: How do you see and I'll I'll stop at this, compound question. How is how are your family and friends holding up in the face of this assault on you and your family? And how do you see this playing out, the battle that you just described? Are you hopeful or no?
Speaker 1: You know, like, I because I've been subject to personal attacks, it's very, one thing like, I have a program of recovery. I've been in recovery for twenty one years. It's just, in a sense, it's what enshrines and helps me practice my relationship with God. It's the most important thing to me. The thing I have to most be observant of and have to keenly avoid is is descent into self centeredness.
When you're when I am very frightened, it's very easy for me to drift into becoming quite myopic and insular. What I've observed, like, in this period from a personal perspective is that, like, I'm incredibly fortunate. I've got an amazing wife. I've got amazing beautiful children that are healthy and doing well. I've got incredible people that I work with.
Like, oh my God. And another thing that's been amazing is like for a month publicly, continually, I was like, you know, called the worst names you can call a man. And then I'd go out in public and people are like, Russell, hey. We support you. We support you.
And like, like one time I was wearing like sort of like a family of all their daughters were aged between like sort of 15 and 19. Oh, can you do photos of that daughter? I was thinking if there were one group that would be negatively affected by what's just been publicly said about me, it would be the parents of teenage kids. And like people aren't. People aren't buying it.
People aren't buying it. That's the problem. People are waking up. People start to think, well, Jesus, is there gonna be a better example than your former and perhaps future president? The more they hate him, the more people like him.
The more people like him because what they know is they don't trust the establishment anymore. They cannot trust the establishment anymore. I was speaking from the perspective of look. This isn't the first time I've known personal crisis. I'm a drug acting recovery.
I'm a product of a single parent family. I've come from I'm a normal person from a from a normal background. But what I would say is that in a sense, a crisis becomes an invitation. A catastrophe is an invitation. And it seems like whether you're on the left or right, everyone believes catastrophe is coming, and it will be an invitation.
It will be an invitation Because if what we are being offered is a slow grind into endless war and more and more authoritarianism and more and more control of our personal lives and our ability to worship, our ability to affiliate, our ability to pray. If what's being if we what we've been invited to accept is the colonization of the self, of our ability to think freely, then what we got to lose when all they're offering us is more war, endless pandemics that are being legislatively enshrined even now through the WHO treaty. What have we actually got to lose? I think in a sense, but in the perhaps they are you know, if there is one God, one all powerful God, then surely that God is at work now. And surely that God is creating the perfect conditions for our mutual awakening.
And perhaps what's required is the spur, the ignition of something so unbearable that people will awaken rather than endure it rather than endure it any further. And perhaps that's what we're being offered now. Yes. Of course, it seems like we're on the precipice of catastrophe geopolitically and from various potential health pandemics. But also, it seems to me like a potential offering to awaken, and I don't think we have any choice other than to see it that way.
Speaker 0: Russell Brand, you have not been broken. You are at your very best. Your very best. And I really appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thanks, Tucker.
reSee.it AI Summary
I'm eagerly anticipating the implementation of @realDonaldTrump's ban on 'gender affirming care' that aims to protect American children from medical procedures I consider harmful. I believe this change should happen in Canada as soon as possible.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
This can't happen soon enough! 👏 @realDonaldTrump's ban on 'gender affirming care' and the medical mutilation & chemical castration/sterilization of kids will come into effect very shortly Finally, common sense prevails and American children will be protected from these monsters This needs to happen in Canada ASAP @BillboardChris
Video Transcript AI Summary
The push for gender transition in children is harmful and must be stopped. On my first day, I will revoke current policies on gender-affirming care, halt federal funding for these procedures, and ensure hospitals that perform them lose federal health standards. I will support legal action against doctors who perform these procedures on minors. Teachers suggesting children might be in the wrong body will face serious consequences. I will advocate for recognizing only male and female genders and protecting parental rights in gender identity matters.
Chloe Cole shares her experience of being misled into believing she was born in the wrong body, leading to irreversible harm. She emphasizes the need for compassion and therapy instead of affirming harmful beliefs. Puberty is a natural process, not a condition to be altered. We must learn from past medical mistakes and protect children from this dangerous trend.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The left wing gender insanity being pushed on our children is an act of child abuse. Very simple. Here's my plan to stop the chemical, physical, and emotional mutilation of our youth. On day 1, I will revoke Joe Biden's cruel policies on so called gender affirming care. Ridiculous.
A process that includes giving kids puberty blockers, mutating their physical appearance, and ultimately performing surgery on minor children. Can you believe this? A new executive order instructing every federal agency to cease all programs that promote the concept of sex and gender transition at any age. I will then ask congress to permanently stop federal taxpayer dollars from being used to promote or pay for these procedures and pass a law prohibiting child sexual mutilation in all 50 states. It'll go very quickly.
I will declare that any hospital or health care provider that participates in the chemical or physical mutilation of minor youth will no longer meet federal health and safety standards for Medicaid and Medicare and will be terminated from the program immediately. Furthermore, I will support the creation of a private right of action for victims to sue doctors who have unforgivably performed these procedures on minor children. The Department of Justice will investigate big pharma and the big hospital networks to determine whether they have deliberately covered up horrific long term side effects of sex transitions in order to get rich at the expense of vulnerable patients, in this case, very vulnerable. We will also investigate whether big pharma or others have illegally marketed hormones and puberty blockers, which are in no way licensed or approved for this use. My Department of Education will inform states and school districts that if any teacher or school official suggests to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body, they will be faced with severe consequences, including potential civil rights violations for sex discrimination and the elimination of federal funding.
As part of our new credentialing body for teachers, we will promote positive education about the nuclear family, the roles of mothers and fathers, and celebrating rather than erasing the things that make men and women different and unique. I will ask congress to pass a bill establishing that the only genders recognized by the United States government are male and female, and they are assigned at birth. The bill will also make clear that title 9 prohibits men from participating in women's sports, and we will protect the rights of parents from being forced to allow their minor child to assume a gender which is new and an identity without the parents' consent. The identity will not be new, and it will not be without parental consent. No serious country should be telling its children that they were born with the wrong gender, a concept that was never heard of in all of human history.
Nobody's ever heard of this, what's happening today. It was all when the radical left invented it just a few years ago. Under my leadership, this madness will end. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: My name is Chloe Cole, and I'm a. Another way to put that would be, I used to believe that I was born the wrong body, and the adults in my life whom I trusted affirmed my belief, and this caused me lifelong irreversible harm. I speak to you today as a victim of one of the biggest medical scandals in the history of the United States of America. I speak to you in the hope that you will have the courage to bring the scandal to an end and ensure that other vulnerable teenagers, children, and young adults don't go through what I went through. At the age of 12, I began to experience what my medical team would later diagnose as gender dysphoria.
I was well into an early puberty, and I was very uncomfortable with the changes that were happening to my body. I was intended I was intimidated by male attention. And when I told my parents that I felt like a boy, in retrospect, all I meant was that I hated puberty, that I wanted this newfound sexual tension to go away, that I looked up to my brothers a little bit more than I did to my sisters. I came out as transgender in a letter I sent on the dining room table. My parents were immediately concerned.
They felt like they needed to get outside help from medical professionals, but this proved to be a mistake. It immediately set our entire family down a path of ideologically motivated deceit and coercion. The gender specialist I was taking to taking to see told my parents that I needed to be put on puberty blocking drugs right away. They asked my parents a simple question. Would you rather have a dead daughter or a living transgender son?
The choice was enough for my parents to let their guard down, and in retrospect, I can't blame them. This is the moment that we all became victims of so called gender affirming care. I was fast tracked onto puberty blockers and then testosterone. The resulting menopausal like hot flashes made focusing on school impossible. I still get joint pains and weird pops in my back, but they were far worse when I was on the blockers.
A month later, when I was 13, I had my first testosterone injection. It's caused permanent changes to my body. My voice will forever be deeper, my jawline sharper, my nose longer, my bone structure permanently masculinized, my Adam's apple more prominent, my fertility unknown. I look in the mirror sometimes, and I feel like a monster. I had a double mastectomy at 15.
They tested my amputated breast for cancer. And I was cancer free, of course. I was perfectly healthy. There was nothing wrong with my still developing body or my breasts other than that as an insecure teenage girl. I felt awkward about it.
After my breasts were taken away from me, the tissue was incinerated. Before I was able to legally drive, I had part I had a huge part of my future womanhood taken from me. I will never be able to breastfeed. I struggle to look at myself in the mirror at times. I will I I still I still struggle to this day with sexual dysfunction.
And I have massive scars across my chest and the skin grafts that they use that they took on my nipples are weeping fluid today, and they are grafted into a more masculine positioning, they said. After surgery, my grades in school plummeted. Everything that I went through did nothing to address my underlying mental health issues that I had. And my doctors, with their theories on gender, thought that all my problems would go away as soon as I was surgically transformed into something that vaguely resembled a boy. Their theories were wrong.
The drugs and surgeries changed my body, but they did not and could not change the basic reality that I am and forever will be a female. When my specialist first told my parents that they could have a dead daughter or a live transgender son, I wasn't suicidal. I was a happy child who struggled because she was different. However, at 16, after my surgery, I did become suicidal. I'm doing better now, but my parents almost got the dead daughter promised to them by my doctors.
My doctors had almost created the very nightmare they said they were trying to avoid. So what message do I want to bring to American teenagers and their families? I didn't need to be lied to. I needed compassion. I needed to be loved.
I needed to be given therapy to help me work through my issues, not affirming my delusion that by transforming into a boy, it would solve all my problems. We need to stop telling 12 year olds that they are born wrong, that they are right to reject their own bodies and feel uncomfortable with their own skin. We need to stop telling children that puberty is an option, that they can choose what kind of puberty they will go through, just they can choose what clothes to wear or what music to listen to. Puberty is a rite of passage to adulthood, not a disease to be mitigated. Today, I should be at home with my family celebrating my 19th birthday, And instead, I'm making a desperate plea to my elected my elected representatives, learn the lessons from other medical scandals like the opioid process, to recognize that doctors are human too, and sometimes they are wrong.
My childhood was ruined along with thousands of detransitioners that I know through our networks. This needs to stop. You alone can stop it. Enough children have already been victimized by this barbaric pseudoscience. Please let me be your final warning.
Thank you.
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a shocking update about the situation in Pickering, Ontario, which could impact all Canadians. Mayor Kevin Ashe is accused of silencing residents and violating their rights. We plan to file a federal lawsuit against the city and its officials to challenge these actions and set a precedent for all municipalities. I urge everyone to support this fight against tyranny, whether through donations or by spreading the message. It's crucial that we hold our elected officials accountable and ensure they serve the interests of all citizens.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
SHOCKING ANNOUNCEMENT & UPDATE - From Pickering City Councilor, Lisa Robinson (@LifelibertyLisa) *Repost & share, this is important for all Canadians What is happening in Pickering, Ontario will very soon affect ALL Canadians residing in virtually every municipality across the country, if it hasn't already. Please share similar stories from your own towns/cities in the comments, we may want to contact you. You can view videos in the comment section that expose unhinged petty tyrant and bully, @MayorKevinAshe as he tramples on citizens charter & human rights by aggressively censoring & silencing ALL residents who DARE to speak out or question his authoritarian rules/policies/agendas. FEDERAL LAWSUIT - Providing that we are able to garner enough public support, we will be filing a federal lawsuit against The Corporation of the @CityofPickering, the Mayor, the CAO, Integrity Commissioner and all City Councilors who have aided & abetted in violating The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Human Rights, and potentially even Criminal Code violations. If successful, which I believe is a slam dunk, we will set a precedent that would applied and enforced to include ALL municipal governments, Mayors, politicians and city officials/employees Canada-wide. Legal fund donations: https://givesendgo.com/CityOfPickeringLawsuit It's very important to remember that these city officials and politicians work for us, not the other way around as they would have us believe. They simply cannot be allowed to intimidate & bully their constituents into silence. Their obligation is to the will and wishes of ALL residents, not just small groups of activists and special interest groups who support their woke policies and agendas. Help us take this fight to Federal Court, by doing nothing we are complicit in their tyranny and providing them with free reign to arbitrarily rule over us however they see fit, nothing changes unless we all work together and take action. It's time to put these petty tyrants back in their place! We'll do all the leg work and heavy lifting, but we need your help to pull this off. We are well aware that times are tough right now, so if you are unable to help financially we totally understand. If that's the case, please at the very least repost this message to as many Canadians and and on as many SM platforms as you can. Legal fund donations: https://givesendgo.com/CityOfPickeringLawsuit Thank you, Shaun & Team @LionAdvocacy @KarlDHarrison @NChartierET @WoodReporting @rupasubramanya @jordanbpeterson @rustyrockets @TuckerCarlson @thevivafrei
Video Transcript AI Summary
Our democracy in Pickering is under threat. Tomorrow's council meeting isn't just a vote; it's a power grab that strips away your rights to speak and hold officials accountable. If this motion passes, unelected integrity commissioners could remove elected officials without your input. They've already limited public participation, reduced speaking times, and restricted media access. Dissenters face fines and trespass orders, silencing opposition. This isn’t just policy; it’s control. We must stand up for our democratic rights and ensure future council members can represent us freely. I will resume town hall meetings to keep you informed about these critical issues. Follow me on social media for updates. Together, we will not be silenced, and democracy in Pickering will not be compromised. Thank you for your support.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Our democracy in Pickering is under attack. What's happening at tomorrow night's council meeting isn't just a simple vote or policy update. It's a takeover. This council is once again grabbing power at your expense stripping away your right to speak, to ask questions, and to hold us as elected officials accountable this isn't democracy it's a dictatorship every word in the motion coming forward from councilors Cook and Nagy is carefully written to take away your most basic rights as voters. If this passes, unelected, city paid integrity commissioners, and a simple vote by council will be given the power to remove any one of us from office, completely disregarding your vote.
You will not even be able to review the evidence or question the integrity commissioner's report as they are asked and receive full immunity from counsel earlier this year and it doesn't stop there. They want to make it so anyone who dares to challenge this power structure can be banned from running for counsel in the following election. Let that sink in. They want to decide who can represent you, who can speak and who can't. Over this term, Pickering Council has already eroded your voice little by little, they cut a question and answer period so you can't call them out, they reduce speaking times, ban Durham residents, our neighbors from speaking on important issues, and they've taken away the public's right to record meetings Pickering residents are even no longer free to address counsel on topics that are important to you without them voting to allow you to speak, They're even controlling the media's access deciding who can or who can't record on what happens in chambers.
And if you dare to speak up against their decisions or question their motives, even if it's on social media, they will hit you with trespass orders from all city property and with fines now raised from $65 to $650 Think about that. They're punishing dissent with fines and trespassing orders to silence you. This isn't just policy, it's control. They wanna control what you're allowed to say, what questions you can ask and what issues they are willing to address. This is authoritarian communist style governance.
They wanna punish those who won't fall in line and ultimately erase any voices they don't want heard. And where is this going to end? These actions go against every principle of democracy and freedom our veterans fought and died for. They sacrificed so that we could live in a nation where power belongs to the people, not to a handful of officials with unchecked power. If we don't stand up now, we risk losing this hard won freedom.
Reckless misuse of your tax dollars, but this and the reckless misuse of your tax dollars but this isn't just about 1 council member it's about ensuring that every future council member has the freedom to express their views of their voters to speak out and to stand up for you without fear of being silenced. Let's look at the facts. They stopped you from asking questions. They stripped away media access and manipulated recordings to control their narrative. They want you to participate on their terms only and only if you agree with them.
Today, they're trying to silence me. Tomorrow will be anyone else who dares to stand up. So to those council members pushing this forward, shame on you. Shame on you for betraying the trust of the people who elected you. Shame on you for putting your agenda above the rights of every person in Pickering.
You don't have the right to decide who can speak, who can serve, or who can participate in our democracy. I wanna be clear. I'm not backing down and I won't stand by silently while this council turns our city into a dictatorship and I will not let them destroy the democracy that gives each of you a voice. If you believe in your freedom, if you want a council that serves you and not just itself, then join me and make your voices heard. Demand transparency.
Refuse to let this council strip you of your rights because this isn't just a motion. It's a battle for the soul of Pickering. It's time to It's a battle for the soul of Pickering. It's time to start showing them that the people of Pickering will not be silenced and that our voices will not be erased and that democracy in Pickering is not for sale. Because of all of this, I will be resuming my town hall meetings in the upcoming month to address these issues happening in our council.
The public needs to be informed and armed with the truth and impact of decisions that have been and are being made. This will be done in a civil, respectful, and democratic manner. Please follow me on Facebook at councilor Lisa Robinson or YouTube, Lisa Robinson, for updates and times. For email updates, subscribe to me at politics with lisa.ca. I'm councilor Lisa Robinson.
Thank you for watching. I look forward to seeing you all very soon, and god bless.
Federal Lawsuit Against The City Of Pickering
THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT LANDMARK FEDERAL LAWSUIT - On behalf of ALL Canadians residing in ALL municipalities across the country
No matter what munici...
givesendgo.com
Federal Lawsuit Against The City Of Pickering
THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT LANDMARK FEDERAL LAWSUIT - On behalf of ALL Canadians residing in ALL municipalities across the country
No matter what munici...
givesendgo.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Attention Pickering, Ontario residents... and others Did you receive one of these in your mailbox this week? More information here: https://action4canada.com/15-minute-cities/
15 Minute Cities | Action4Canada
Serve the SMART/15 Minute City Notice of Liability and Print and Share the flyer HERE.
action4canada.com
reSee.it AI Summary
A new peer-reviewed paper from Poland highlights how initial claims about mRNA vaccines being safe have shifted dramatically over the past few years. Early literature denied any serious adverse events, but recent studies acknowledge significant risks. The paper argues that biases influenced by social, economic, and political pressures affected scientific reporting. It emphasizes the need for objectivity in medical research, especially given the competitive climate among global powers. The evolving narrative raises concerns about the integrity of vaccine safety evaluations.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*BREAKING - New peer reviewed paper out of Poland reveals yet more C-19 vaccine 'conspiracy theories' to actually be 'conspiracy facts'. *Repost & share with friends, family and colleagues - All papers and source links referenced in John's presentation can be found below. Video and information credit: Dr. John Campbell (@Johnincarlisle on X) - Subscribe to John's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching "Changing Views toward mRNA based Covid Vaccines in the Scientific Literature: 2020 - 2024 paom.pl/Changing-Views… Before the global Covid-19 pandemic mRNA based vaccines had never been administered to the public, (outside of a single clinical trial that was not completed at the time.) The aim of this article is to raise awareness that medical science can be biased due to social and economic influences, especially during high stress epochs in history. Scientists should be conscious of always being objective and skeptical regardless of what is happening in the wider world. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33332359/ Material and methods A literature survey was performed examining the reporting of severe adverse events (SAEs) in articles published between 2020 and 2024. 4,130 articles Results and discussion From 2020 to 2024, the literature has gone from claiming there are absolutely no SAEs from mRNA based vaccines (2020/2021), to an acknowledgment of a significant number of various SAEs (2023/2024). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38350768/ Conclusions The early scientific literature was biased, so as not to report SAEs, due to social and political concerns, and overwhelming corporate greed. Only in the last year have scientists been able to publish articles that acknowledge a high number of SAEs linked to mRNA based vaccines. This should act as a warning that science should be completely objective when evaluating health risks, but can often be influenced by social and economic considerations. More detail International competition between the United States, Russia and China All three countries claiming their vaccine was the most effective and the safest. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32663910/ For unknown reasons, the United States chose to invest heavily into mRNA based vaccines, as opposed to other types of vaccines with stronger research supporting the underlying technology. Due to competition between the world’s three super-powers, no country wanted to admit there were any problems with their nation’s vaccination program. Unfortunately, these toxic politics entered into the scientific literature en force. Three time periods, 2020 to April 2024 2020 to the end of 2021 Scientific literature claimed there were absolutely no serious adverse events (SAEs) whatsoever January to August 2022 Scientific literature claimed there were some SAEs, but they were very rare and that mRNA vaccines were a miracle drug September 2022 to April 2024 Characterized as being highly skeptical of mRNA based vaccines. E.g. COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38350768/ Significant OE ratios were found for Guillain–Barré syndrome, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, myocarditis and pericarditis. Conclusions A drastic shift in the medical literature occurred concerning mRNA based vaccines between 2020 and 2024. The early literature seems to have been heavily biased in favour of promoting an experimental vaccine, without any previously completed human clinical trials, for both monetary and political purposes. Even as reports of SAEs became too numerous to dismiss in 2022, the literature at the time simply down played SAEs as extremely rare. Even though there were blatantly obvious conflicts of interest, such as vaccine producers publishing manuscripts promoting their own vaccine, articles were published in very prestigious journals. It wasn’t until late 2022 that the first criticisms of mRNA vaccines began to appear and, as time goes by, more articles are becoming more vocal about completely banning all mRNA vaccines until they can be thoroughly tested for safety concerns. The drastic shift in attitude towards mRNA vaccines in only about three years shows serious vulnerabilities in Western medical research."
Dr. John Campbell
Hello Everyone,My name is John Campbell and I am a retired Nurse Teacher and former clinical nurse based in England. I also do some teaching in Asia and Afri...
youtube.com
Understanding COVID-19 vaccine demand and hesitancy: A nationwide online survey in China - PubMed
The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. It is important to improve health promotion and reduce the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals - PubMed
This multi-country analysis confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Other potential safety signals that require further investigation were identified.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The Covid-19 Vaccine-Development Multiverse - PubMed
The Covid-19 Vaccine-Development Multiverse
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals - PubMed
This multi-country analysis confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Other potential safety signals that require further investigation were identified.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m gearing up for a pivotal court battle on November 18th, 2024, in Toronto, as we continue our fight for justice for 6-7 million unvaccinated Canadians affected by Trudeau's vaccine travel ban. We face a motion from the Attorney General aimed at dismissing our case, which has been ongoing for over two years. Despite mainstream media silence, our story has gained traction internationally. I urge everyone to support our legal fund as we strive to expose the government's actions and seek accountability.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
IMPORTANT UPDATE: Vaccine Travel Mandates Lawsuit We are now just over 6 weeks away from heading back into Federal Court to continue our fight, seeking justice for 6-7 million 'unvaccinated' Canadians who were brutally segregated, demonized and illegally stripped of their charter rights during Trudeau's tyrannical vaccine travel ban. *Please be sure to repost this update, we are now officially the last case standing and the only hope left to hold these charlatans accountable for their crimes. It's going to be one hell of a battle, so we're going to need all of the help and support we can muster - Thank you This first round of our continued 'Samson vs Goliath' battle will take place on November 18th, 2024 at Toronto Federal Court. At this hearing we will be forced to defend an egregiously preposterous motion filed by the Attorney General of Canada, @viraniarif to have our case struck. Yet another vile attempt to financially bankrupt us and prevent our irrefutable evidence from ever being made public, all to protect his corrupt boss at any cost by having our case thrown out before any of our damning evidence can be heard at a public Federal Court hearing. Below are some links which provide a summary and recap on the lawsuits which my friend & co-applicant, @KarlDHarrison and I have filed against, @JustinTrudeau and the Liberal Government, and our evidence. As many of you know, these cases have been ongoing for well over 2 years now. Its been a long, arduous, grueling , and often very dirty fight, but we now have ALL the receipts we need to expose the government's lies, corruption & deceit, we just need to make it to a public hearing in Federal Court. MSM News in Canada have intentionally buried our story and have refused to report on it even once over these past few years. This is very likely due to their sworn allegiance to the Liberal Government, in exchange for the approx. $600 million dollars they receive annually in the form of taxpayer funded bailout payments. All this despite our lawsuit being one of the most important landmark cases in recent Canadian history. However, it has been covered in the UK, US, and Australia. Interview with our friend, @jordanbpeterson: https://youtu.be/zQLMctYO36E?si=BKnCcbcVPDtIzasx… Interview with GB News in the UK: https://youtu.be/fsxQgUld9lA?si=cvkctGQGHKDI71bL… The Telegraph in the UK: https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/08/12/tyranny-justin-trudeau-has-finally-exposed-two-brits-no-less/ Bari Weiss' Free Press in the US: https://thefp.com/p/court-documents-reveal-canadas-travel If you would like to help support this historic and incredibly import lawsuit, you can do so by donating to our legal fund via our official charity, tax receipts can be provided upon request: https://freedomandjustice.ca/donate/ @elonmusk @CSinclairtv @jordanbpeterson @DrJBhattacharya @thevivafrei @LionAdvocacy @TuckerCarlson @rustyrockets @DonaldJTrumpJr @DavidKrayden @natalimorris @TheRedactedInc @brianlilley @GBNEWS @Telegraph @ConradMBlack @therationalpost @nationalpost @WoodReporting @DavidKrayden @ReginaWatteel @JimFergusonUK @TomMarazzo @BulfordDaniel @LichTamara @BillboardChris @Martyupnorth_2
The tyranny of Justin Trudeau has finally been exposed - and by two Brits, no less
A lawsuit has shown Canada's travel vaccine mandate had little to do with science and everything to do with politics
telegraph.co.uk
Court Documents Reveal Canada’s Travel Ban Had No Scientific Basis
In the days leading up to the mandate, transportation officials were frantically looking for a rationale for it. They came up short.
thefp.com
Donate - The Institute for Freedom and Justice
freedomandjustice.ca
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*Correction - David vs Goliath.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Dr. Jason Christoff, Mind Control Specialist presents at the International Crisis Summit in Washington DC - February 25th 2024
Video Transcript AI Summary
Jason Christophe discusses the weaponization of psychology and propaganda during COVID, focusing on confusion, group pressure, fear, guilt, and other tactics used on the public. He emphasizes the importance of understanding psychological manipulation to combat future manipulation. Christophe calls for individuals to lead with morality and ethics, urging them to reclaim their power and make the world great again. He encourages listeners to be brave, take action, and let their voices be heard. The message is to stand up against manipulation and strive for justice and ethics.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My name is Jason Christophe. My presentation today will be weaponized psychology and propaganda during the COVID operation. Please move ahead, Rob. The first psychological weapon used against the public during COVID was confusion. Next slide.
Confusing a targeted audience is one of the necessary ingredients for effective mind control. This is from Doctor. Joost Merlou. He was a behavioral modification expert. Confusion sets the subconscious into believing it lacks clarity, believing it self unable to make logical decisions.
Therefore, our neurological system finds it safer to outsource personal authority and decision making to external third parties when confused. Next slide. As you can see in this diagram, destructive interference, opposing beliefs cancel each other out energetically, causing a flat line and a cessation of thought. That means if you're in the ruling group and you can confuse the group you're ruling, you can stop them from thinking, and then you will be able to manhandle them psychologically at will. Next slide.
This is confusion examples launched at the public during COVID. Gyms were closed during declared health emergencies. Yet liquor stores, fast food restaurants, weed shops in Canada and junk food corner stores were open for business. You weren't permitted to bring your own grocery bags from home to the grocery store, yet you were permitted to wear your clothes to the grocery store, which also came from home. Next slide.
You had to enter a restaurant standing wearing a mask, yet when you sat down, you could take the same mask off and then the mask back on when using the toilet. Doug Ford's medical adviser, doctor Yaffe, in Ontario, Canada, declared that testing teachers daily for COVID wasn't being done because the test is unreliable 50% or more of the time, yet the same testing was deemed mandatory and essential by the same government for many other sectors. Were you confused? Of course you were, because that was the design intent. Doctor.
Fauci proudly declaring at the beginning of the pandemic, no masks were magically, masks did not matter. Big box stores all open. Local businesses closed. Vaccines were declared safe and effective, but vaccine makers insisted that they hold no lie legal liability for death or injury from those safe and effective vaccines. News anchors parroted key phrases like trust the science, get the science to be trusted was never displayed and anyone asking to verify the science was attacked and told they were anti science.
Pfizer even petitioned the U. S. Government to hide their vaccine safety data for 75 years. Nothing says safe and effective more than hiding your own safety data for more than 7 decades. If someone died or was injured within 14 days of taking any COVID injection, that death or injury was listed as occurring in the unvaccinated.
All that while VAERS data indicated that the vast majority of deaths and permanent injuries occurred within 72 hours of the COVID injection and that would be deaths and injuries in the unvaccinated. Some strip joints were were frequent because, of course, the virus can now count, attacking you in a group of 11 but not in a group of 9. It also wears a watch, attacking at 10:0:1 p. M. In the curfew zone, but not at 9:59.
Deferred to nonexled experts bypassing the very foundations of our democracy. Were you confused? Of course, you were. That was the designed intent. We regressed into taxation without representation.
Experts were unwilling to discuss and debate what they claim expertise in. Many doctors, judges, police, military, lawyers and pharmacists violated their patient citizen protection oaths because of large payouts to do so. Multi gender programming erupted, plus men started to dominate female sports in female safe areas. When you're going to weaponize confusion against the public, you pile it high and wide. Vows made to protect grandma were widespread as grandma was being mistreated, disrespected, abused and even medically euthanized.
Measures said to go ahead, Rob. Measures said to protect lives obviously destroyed lives, communities and our collective humanity. Local businesses in Ontario, Canada, were eventually made bankrupt and closed via the wait for it Reopening Ontario Act, a very clever use of Orwellian Doublespeak, an aerosolized viral pathogen that could take people down at will, like a well perched assassin, could only be tested for by driving a swab deep into the nasal cavity. If the extremely dangerous pathogen floats in the air, why can't we breathe on the swab? Well, that's because confusing a targeted audience is one of the necessary ingredients for effective mind control.
Psychological weapon number 2, hurled at the public during the COVID operation was group pressure. If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it? This is from Edward Bernays, otherwise known as the father of propaganda. Human pressure to fit into the herd is genetic, a safety mechanism which operates outside our control, much like how a cut heals itself. We're designed to seek safety in the bigger group.
We're designed to feel afraid and vulnerable when we believe we're in the smaller group. We seek safety first, not happiness, nor logic, nor rational analysis of our problems. This is Justin Trudeau's famous small fringe minority speech. If we look at it together, we can look for the weaponized group pressure hurled at the public. Let's read it together.
It's important to underline that close to 90% of truckers in this country are vaccinated, like close to 90% of Canadians. Canadians have stepped up to protect each other, our frontline workers, to protect our elders, to protect our youth. And the overwhelming majority, close to 90%, have done exactly that, got vaccinated. The small fringe minority who are holding unacceptable views do not represent the views of Canadians who know that following the signs and stepping up to protect each other is the best way to ensure our freedoms, our rights, and our values. This is a clear indication of where the safe majority can be found and a clear indication of where the unsafe minority can be found.
The human nervous system takes it from there. And as you can see, there's also confusion as this man laments to be protecting our freedoms, our rights, and our values as he destroys our freedoms, our rights and our values. Other weaponized psychology used against the public during the COVID operation fear, guilt, shame, disempowering repetitive content, psychological priming, flooding the zone with utter liara, abuses of power, demoralization, destabilization, paycheck mind control, bullying, psychic terrorism, isolation, and poisoning, just to name a few. Let's end today with 3 quotes. If we know how the magician executes his tricks, the magic show fails to impress.
This is why it's very important each and every one of you learn about psychological manipulation so we can sidestep the next sci manipulation so we can sidestep the next psyop that comes our way. You can't farm lions, only lambs. And all this psychological formed human lamb. Evil spares no one and uses everyone. This is a message to the people under paycheck mind control who are selling our souls to the highest bidder, when you become surplus to requirement, you will be wiped off the chessboard as quick as you were put on it.
Mark my words. Ending remarks. It is time we all lead with morality and ethics once again. It's time each person dedicate on a personal level to the founding principles of our great nations. I have a dream, a dream to see justice, morality, and ethics fly high over all our lands once again.
It is time to level up, adult up, power up, and lion up. The great lion in all of us sleeps no more. I believe in each and every one of you. It's time we all bring the light back. We will make the world great again by making ourselves great again.
Be brave, lead, take action, fear nothing, and let your line be heard. Pay very close attention today to the work of doctor Merrill Nass. This fight is for all the marbles. Lying up and remember your roar. My name is Jason Kristoff.
Thank you for listening.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
"We found that 73.9% of deaths were directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination. Our data suggest a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and death." https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073824001968 *Be sure to repost, this needs to be seen by as many people as possible.
A Systematic REVIEW of Autopsy findings in deaths after covid-19 vaccination
The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with a high number of adverse event reports, have led to concerns over possible mechanisms of inj…
sciencedirect.com
reSee.it AI Summary
The RCMP chief expressed hope that MPs would not name politicians accused of aiding foreign powers in the House, citing parliamentary privilege. Critics argue that the chief's understanding of parliamentary privilege appears limited, calling it a sign of incompetence. Source: CBC News.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
"RCMP chief says he hopes MPs don't name politicians accused of aiding foreign powers in the House MPs enjoy parliamentary privilege in the House of Commons, including freedom from arrest" Yes, you read & heard that correctly, welcome to the banana republic of Canada. Listen closely at 0:37. How incompetent can the Chief of the RCMP be to only know "about 5%" of what parliamentary privilege means? Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/duheme-nsicop-arrest-parliamentary-privilege-1.7243015#:~:text=Politics-,RCMP%20chief%20says%20he%20hopes%20MPs%20don't%20name%20politicians,accused%20of%20aiding%20foreign%20powers.
Video Transcript AI Summary
There are concerns about releasing the names of parliamentarians in the unredacted NCAP report. The speaker emphasizes the importance of protecting secret information to maintain trade partnerships. They mention the distinction between need-to-know and right-to-know when sharing information with the government. If an MP were to reveal classified information under parliamentary privilege, it would pose a challenge for the RCMP Commissioner. The speaker hopes to avoid such a situation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The the fact that there are currently people who are demanding the government release the names of parliamentarians cited in that unredacted version of the NCAP report. How how do you feel about the prospect of that happening?
Speaker 1: Well, I I I let, I'll let the government decide how they see best to do this, but I I am concerned if we're starting to to disclose secret or top secret information, again, it puts in peril, it could put in peril, trade craft, partnerships, especially international partnership. I'm one that I appreciate the fact that parliamentary privilege is something and I just know about 5% of parliamentary privilege. But I think we have to be mindful how that information is shared. I don't brief the minister of public's seat on every single that we have. Yeah.
Because I think there's a need to know and then a right to know. Right? And and if there comes a threshold that, yes, I'll bring the minister in and brief him on the file, but I don't brief him on every single file. And I I think we just have to approach this very cautiously.
Speaker 0: What is your understanding then if someone, if an MP got up inside the House of Commons under parliamentary privilege and decided to reveal this information? What's your understanding of what your role would be as commissioner of the RCMP? You you you couldn't do anything or you could do something?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm inclined to say that would be a challenge for us. If it was out in the public domain, it'd be different because you're disclosing, top secret information or secret information. Let's hope we don't have to cross that, that road.
RCMP chief says he hopes MPs don't name politicians accused of aiding foreign powers in the House | CBC News
The head of the RCMP says he’s uneasy with the idea that politicians could use their parliamentary privilege to name colleagues accused of aiding foreign powers.
cbc.ca
reSee.it AI Summary
The truth about MAiD is being revealed, and it is being compared to Nazi-level evil. Interviews with @KelsiBurns and @jordanbpeterson shed light on this issue. Stay informed with these accounts: @rupasubramanya, @WoodReporting, @NChartierET, @thevivafrei, @LionAdvocacy, @ConradMBlack, @rustyrockets, @TuckerCarlson, @TCNetwork, @TheRedactedInc, @NataliMorris, @ClaytonMorris, and @DavidKrayden.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
***BREAKING - The horrifying truth about MAiD Canadians beware - If correct, as the Doctors who testified have suggested, this truly is Nazi level evil With @jordanbpeterson and @KelsiBurns - More interviews with Kelsi here: https://www.youtube.com/@jordanbpeterson @rupasubramanya @WoodReporting @NChartierET @thevivafrei @LionAdvocacy @ConradMBlack @rustyrockets @TuckerCarlson @TCNetwork @TheRedactedInc @NataliMorris @ClaytonMorris @DavidKrayden
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses concerns about MAID, highlighting issues with the drug sodium thiopental used in the procedure. They discuss the potential drowning effect of the drug and criticize the lack of transparency in the process. The speaker questions the ethics of MAID, pointing out the financial motivations behind it and the impact on vulnerable individuals. They emphasize the need for honesty and moral integrity in these practices.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, here's what's really troubling about that, and nobody seems to know this. So I'd love the opportunity to talk about it because it's really concerning to me. So it's not only that it's MAID. People don't understand how MAID works. There's the track 1, the track 2, you know, the immediate, the 90 data, end of life, and and all of that.
And and, yes, they are they they stayed the bill till 2027 to the next vote. Yeah. Right? So that's all great. So, technically, mental health is not included.
But what I found out yesterday that really, really bothered me was the mechanism of the actual procedure. So there's this drug called sodium ferropental, and it's made in Italy. Okay? So it's used by anesthesiologists. And the anesthesiologists, that came forward with this at this testimony was this individual had been an anesthesiologist for 25 years.
He came forward with the senate subcommittee talking about this with MAID and his concerns with it because MAID is being seen as compassionate and empathetic in care. So what he did is
Speaker 1: You know, the the Nazi euthanasia program started with compassion and care. Right?
Speaker 0: I'm so glad you said that because when I got to do trigonometry, we went to the war museums. And what terrified me the most was walking through the World War 2 portion and seeing the same verbiage.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. It's the same thing. Yeah. Definitely.
Speaker 0: People were telling me I was going crazy. I'm like, no. No. No. You don't understand.
Speaker 1: The same thing.
Speaker 0: It's identical.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's exactly the same thing.
Speaker 0: The mentally ill, the people that are yep. Yeah. So what's really
Speaker 1: People too distressed to live. Thank you. Right. Right. And the categories keep expanding.
Speaker 0: Mhmm. And that's what we're seeing, the ex expansion. So the sodium, thiopental, which was really wild about it, is this anesthesiologist was like, it's going missing. We don't have a lot of it. We can't get it anymore all of a sudden over these past couple years.
And so he started researching it. Canada, in But Canada, in North like, in North America, the United States and Canada had been using it for execution in America for death penalty. So they finally caught on to that, and anesthesiologists use it as one of the first drugs pushed to put you under. But here's what's really crazy is they said, well, this is there's gotta be more to this. So they did a it's a freedom of information act with the NPR, with a journalist, and they got over 300 autopsies of individuals who were executed in America.
And they didn't just get the autopsy kind of overview. They were given in-depth files. And when they went through them, 85% of those bodies showed a 2 times level increase of water in the lungs. So what was happening is when this drug is pushed, Meaning, the reason people in Canada who are given MAID seem peaceful is because they're giving a paralytic first. So they're completely paralyzed.
Then this drug is administered as one of the 4, and they start drowning to death. Okay? So that means that when it's done by IV, it takes 10 to 15 minutes. That person could be literally drowning. Well, they are.
They're drowning to death, but they could be screaming if they weren't under a paralytic. They're drowning to death. We waterboard people in Guantanamo. There's a reason we had to stop. It falls under cruel and unusual punishment.
Yet we are having people like dying with dignity say that this falls under compassion and empathy when you're drowning people chemically to death.
Speaker 1: You found this out at the senate hearing?
Speaker 0: No. I found this out yesterday when the senate hearing was given to me and the transcripts were given to me. It was doctor Joel b Zivok, associate professor of Emory University and School of Medicine, the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. So what's been happening is that case I was telling you about, Fraser Health is withholding the families. They can't see her autopsy.
They're not allowing it. They won't give access. The police have tried to get it.
Speaker 1: The same case.
Speaker 0: This is the same yeah. Yeah. So they will not give it to the family. So freeze your health is a bed, like, literally lying and holding information back. So what's wild about this though is dying with dignity says that this is a painless death.
Well, if you take MAID orally, it takes between 30 minutes to 24 hours. 24 hours of active drowning while you're under a paralytic. So the autopsies are showing that you actually drowned to death, and you're waterboarded to death within your own body, and you can't move or do anything about it. And that's how dying with dignity in the Canadian government has disguised made while they're offering it to Canadian veterans instead of treatment so they don't have to pay for their pensions, so they don't have to pay for their health care, the same way they don't do it properly.
Speaker 1: Slippery soap business because it makes such well, I saw I saw the other day, a month ago probably, I think it was a Japanese philosopher who said that it was incumbent on the elderly to submit themselves to government assisted dying because of the benefits on the cost saving side?
Speaker 0: So in 20 this is one of my favorite ones. I love this one because most people don't know this. So in 2021, they had a gross reduction in health care of a $109,200,000 When they did MAID, they saved another. They cut out another 22,000,000. So by by by the end of it all, in that year, the health care system just from doing made instead of actually giving people palliative care, was 86,900,000 alone.
That's just 1 year without the spike. In 2021, it was 10,500. 2022, it's 13,000, and there's been a 30% increase since then. And a high rate is happening in British Columbia. High cost of living, nowhere to live, no housing, and no one to look after these people because the younger individuals just don't have the finances because they can't even buy their own home.
So how could they then put somebody in care that costs 8 to $10,000 a month when you can't even afford to live in a 2 bedroom basement apartment. And furthermore, there's no housing because we're taking every single person into this country and acting as if Canadians are second citizens because that's what's happening. Canada is falling. We have no identity. We're killing our own citizens, and people act like people like me are going crazy.
I'm not going crazy. I'm screaming at the top of my lungs. We are killing innocent people, and children are on the chalk like, they are on the chopping block. If we didn't stop that bill by 17th, children down to the age of 12 with parent consent. A 17 year old could walk into a hospital and say, I wanna die by MAID.
And guess what? If you try to stop it as a parent, you will be arrested. I'm not sure morally where we have either lost our minds, lost the plot, been paid off, or just decided that we no longer care about the generation after us. But something is going really wrong when I have group homes calling me or messaging me on Instagram going, Kelsey, I'm hearing of huge swaths of these groups sitting down going, convincing each other to die, that they're gonna walk in together.
Speaker 1: Mhmm. Mhmm.
Speaker 0: Mhmm. Because Simons has made it seem like it's bubbles on a beach in a cave.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
No. That's the representation that I was talking about. But what
Speaker 0: are we we saying to the youth that there's no future, there's no goals, you can't buy a home, there's nowhere to live, you can't get a don't try to get a doctor's appointment.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Don't bother. So, honestly, what do they have to look forward to? But I'm telling you right now, this has never been talked about. This part here where it is drowning to death, where you're waterboarding to death, no one, not one person has said this. I have never heard this.
Speaker 1: And you just found out about this?
Speaker 0: Yesterday. And I found out because there was an event, in South Surrey that my girlfriend I was telling you about her mother was taken. She was at, and she goes, Kelsey, one of the Delta Hospice Centers is being shut down because they refused to do MAID. So it wasn't necessarily rebel, but it was Sheila and, Keyon. They made this documentary to talk to people like us going they're saying that they need government right to do this, but, hey, they're already doing it, and they've been doing it.
And we have audio recordings of veterans. We have the minister of veterans affairs lying to Mercedes Stevenson on the West Block saying it was one veteran when we have multiple veterans, multiple case managers, audio recordings, and written testimonies. So are we just okay with everyone lying now? Is that where we're at? We accept lies as truth and no there's no moral qualms with that?
Because if anybody is a God fearing individual right now, the whole idea is I don't really care what you believe in. All I ask is stop lying. Be honest. If you wanna kill people to save money, say it. That's it.
Just say what you mean, but stop dancing around like you're doing this out of empathy. You are killing vulnerable people to save money, to send to another country that bought you out in 2,000 and was it 13? And that's a CSIS document. We sold our country. We sold our people.
And we told our youth that we should just die because there's nothing to live for in this country. How am I supposed to combat that? I'm one voice up there. Thank god you showed up. If you didn't show up, none of us, people like me, would have no footsteps to walk and we would have no path carved out for us.
You, the first in the door, you took the heat. You're like the breacher. You're the guy that shows up and goes, I'm gonna kick that door, and then whatever's gonna come is I'm just gonna take it because I have to. You had a moral obligation because if you didn't do it, the rest of us would have nowhere to go and nowhere would've turned if you didn't show up. So I'm so grateful to be here, and I'm so grateful that you gave us the space because I don't know what else to do.
Because I can't scream any louder. I'm loud, but I don't know what else to do anymore. We deserve better and so do our kids and so do our citizens. We don't deserve this. Canada doesn't deserve no no one deserves to be waterboarded to death except for the people that deserve to be waterboarded to death.
And there are people that deserve to be waterboarded to death. And I can tell you right now that I've seen that done to someone. You don't wish that on anyone. You don't wish that on anyone. It would have been easier it's easier to put bricks around my feet and go jump in the ocean than it is to die by maid.
That is a that is a terrifying way to die.
Jordan B Peterson
Jordan B. Peterson is a Canadian professor of psychology, clinical psychologist, YouTube personality, best-selling author and host of the #1 Education Podcas...
youtube.com
reSee.it AI Summary
The posts question the acceptability of a scientist's words and actions at UofT, calling for disciplinary action and even arrest for alleged fraud. The posts suggest that fraudulent data was used to support a tyrannical government and harm millions of Canadians. The author asks for comments on the matter and shares a link to more tweets by Dr. David Fisman. No hashtags are included.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Are these words/actions acceptable or becoming of a @UofT 'Scientist' or 'Professor'? Why has this man not yet been disciplined, or even arrested for fraud? After all, it now appears to be very clear that his fraudulent data was intentionally used as a weapon by Trudeau and the MSM to prop up a tyrannical fascistic government, to intentionally persecute, segregate, demonize and vindictively punish approx. 7 million Canadian men, women and children in order to further a heinous agenda. Post your comments and/or words which for you best describe the true character of a man like, Dr. David Fisman. @UofT, care to comment? Read 100+ more of Fisman's vile and hateful tweets: #FismansFraud - See attached post for more context. @KarlDHarrison @ReginaWatteel
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*BREAKING* "Trudeau caught using fraudulent data to impose lockdowns and tyrannical mandates on Canadians" Bombshell interview with our friend, Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of the bestselling book Fisman's Fraud: https://amzn.to/47X11iu @jordanbpeterson @TuckerCarlson @WoodReporting @KarlDHarrison @ConradMBlack @brianlilley @rupasubramanya @NChartierET @nationalpost @globalnews @CBC @CTVNews @CP24 @TheTorontoSun
Amazon.com
amazon.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
"Excess Deaths In Japan Hit 115,000 Following 3rd COVID Shot; New Study Explains Why" Here's the study - 'Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality': https://www.cureus.com/articles/196275-increased-age-adjusted-cancer-mortality-after-the-#!/media More here: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/excess-deaths-japan-hit-115000-following-3rd-covid-shot-new-study-explains-why
Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan
During the COVID-19 pandemic, excess deaths including cancer have become a concern in Japan, which has a rapidly aging population. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate how age-adjusted mortality rates (AMRs) for different types of cancer in Japan changed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Official statistics from Japan were used to compare observed annual and monthly AMRs with predicted rates based on pre-pandemic (2010-2019) figures using logistic regression analysis. No significant excess mortality was observed during the first year of the pandemic (2020). However, some excess cancer mortalities were observed in 2021 after mass vaccination with the first and second vaccine doses, and significant excess mortalities were observed for all cancers and some specific types of cancer (including ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate cancer, lip/oral/pharyngeal cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast cancer) after mass vaccination with the third dose in 2022. AMRs for the four cancers with the most deaths (lung, colorectal, stomach, and liver) showed a decreasing trend until the first year of the pandemic in 2020, but the rate of decrease slowed in 2021 and 2022. This study discusses possible explanations for these increases in age-adjusted cancer mortality rates.
cureus.com
Excess Deaths In Japan Hit 115,000 Following 3rd COVID Shot; New Study Explains Why
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
zerohedge.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING: Prof. Masanori Fukushima, Japan's most senior Oncologist condemns mRNA vaccines as "Evil Practices of Science" More here from a year ago - "Prof Fukushima addresses MHLW in the House of Councilors" https://synctia.u-aizu.ac.jp/w/8795e625-bc1c-48cf-affb-db8a8f69b225
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker, a medical oncologist, discusses the introduction and spread of medical oncology in Japan. They mention the increase in cases of fast-progressing cancer and the need for doctors to share information. They express concern about the risks associated with the COVID-19 vaccine and highlight cases of adverse effects and deaths. They criticize the World Health Organization (WHO) for its handling of the vaccine and call for an investigation into the damages caused. The speaker also mentions ongoing research on the effectiveness of vitamin D in treating COVID-19. They express frustration with the scientific community's lack of transparency and call for more comprehensive research on the genetic vaccine. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of science and the need for accountability.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: ご 質 問 ありがとうございます 。私は 日 本 で 最 も 年 長 な メディカル ン ポロ ジ スト です。 で 、 メディカル ン ポロ ジ を 日 本 語 に 訳 す と 腫 瘍 な い かっ て いう ん です が 、これ は 私 が 最 初 に そう いう 名称 で 新 た な ディ シ プリン と し て 普 及 する 、普及 さ せ 、定 着 さ せる こと を キャンペーン 法 を やっ て い き ま し た 。私は 日 本 で 初め て 京 都 大 学 に が ん の アウト
Speaker 1: ペー ション クリニック を
Speaker 0: 開 設 し た わけ です し、その 前 に 京 都 大 学 に は 2020 年 に 愛 知 見 が ん センター 、 前職 は 愛知 県 西 センター ホ スピ タル の セ クション 変 動 し て お り ま し た 。 アメリカ の 工 事 。そこ で 京 都 大 学 に ファー マック ・エ ピ デ ミ オ ロジー の 講座 を 日 本 で 最 初 に 作っ た わけ です 。やはり 、ターボ ガン と 言わ れる 今 ま で に 医 師 が 経験 し て な い よう な 非常 スピード が 速 い 、見つか っ た 時 に は もう 4 期 で ある と 進 行 し た が ん で ある と いう ケース が ちらほら に 訪 れる こと に な っ て 、それ で 今 ま で と は そう いう 風 に 違 う ということ を 医 師 同 士 が や は り 情報 共 有 し 合う よう に な っ て ま し た 。 です から それ が 去 年 、一昨 年 ぐらい
Speaker 1: から です ね。 だ ん だ ん
Speaker 0: そういうこと だ と 。やはり が ん に 関連 し て 、この 異 常 な こと が 起 こ っ て いる ん じゃ な い か と いう の は 、医師 は 現 場 から 感 じ 取っ て い ま し た 。 だ から 今 回 し か も こ の 解析 し た 結 果 から は です ね 驚く べ き っ て こと に 特定 の が ん 種 が です ね ワクチン 接種 等 関連 し て 増 え 、あの 消 化 脂 肪 が 起 き て いる よう に 見 える ということ です 。まず は 乳 が ん と か 卵 巣 が ん と か 膵臓 が ん と か 、それ から 統 計 部 の です ね 、 乗員 頭 、靴 、 口腔 が ん です ね。これ ら が もう 一 つ は 男 性 の 前立 腺 管 、こう いう が ん が 特 異 的 に 超 過 死 亡 、これ は 人 為 的 だ と いう か 、つまり パン デミック に よっ て 検 診 、早期 に 受 診 で き なかっ た 、あるいは 治療 を 受け る 機 会 を ロス し た と か いう 事 で は 全 然 説明 で き な い 現 象 だ と 思い ます 。 です から リ ビュー し た 症例 は です ね 、もう 解 放 も さ れ て いる んですけど も ワクチン に よっ て 心 臓 が 溶 け た 。 平 た く 言 え ば 、 心筋 の 訪問 菌 融 解 に よっ て 亡 く な っ た 2 8 歳 の 男 性 で 、今 ま で 医 者 に かかっ た こと が な い 人 が 、 会 社 の 二 回 目 の ワクチン を 打っ た 一 日 後 に 朝 、奥 さ ん が 起こし に 行っ た ら 死ん で た 。 で 、当然 こと な が ら 警 察 を 呼 ん で 、それ で 大学 病 院 に 運 ん で、そこ で 解 剖 する と 。 解 剖 し た 先 生 と 話 し た ら 、介護 し た 先 生 は 、心臓 を 取り 出そう と 思っ た ら フニャフニャ で 仰 天 し た と いう と 。 と。 心 臓 が どう です 、 フニャフニャ な っ た 。この よう な 症例 も ある ということ は 、もう そ の 一連 を 持っ て し て も です ね 、いかに こ の ワクチン が 危 険 か ということ が 分 か る わけ です。 だ から 私 から 見 れ ば ね 、健康 な 人 が 今 ま で 病 気 が 無かっ た 人 、いつ 死ぬ か 分 から な い 人 じゃなくて 、健康 で 何 も 問 題 なかっ た 人 が ワクチン を 打っ て 死ん だ と いう の は 重大 です よ 。これ は、 殺 人 です よ 、結局 は 。私は 私 は そう いう 風 に は っきり 言 い た い です 。これ は やっぱり 重大 な 話 だ と 思い ます 。で、その こと に つい て マスコミ も き ち っ と 報 道 は し な い し です ね 、新聞 も 取り 上げ な い 。これ は やっぱり 歪 ん で ます 。私は 今 は 医 学 の 危機 、医療 の 危機 のみ な ら ず 、科学 の 重大 な 危機 で あり 、 民主 主 義 の 危機 で ある と いう ふう に 私 は 非常 に 危機 感 を 募 ら し て い ます 。 科 学 者 と し て 医 者 と し て です ね 、この ワクチン は 断じ て 国 家 レベル で やる べ き も の で は なかっ た し 、本来 は こ の ワクチン は 承 認 さ れ て 、何 て 言 う か な 、あの に 出 る も の で は なかっ た と いう 風 に 私 は 楽観 し ます 、現 時 点 で は 。 W HO が これ 全 国 の です ね 、医療 事 情 も 違 う し 習慣 も 違 う し 、制度 も 違 う 国 に つい て 一 律 に ワクチン 接種 を W HO が 指 揮 を 取っ て やる
Speaker 1: と いう
Speaker 0: の は 根 本 的 に 間 違っ て ます から 。 医 療 は 、人々 の 生 活 習 慣 、そして 医 療 制 度 、それ から そ の 国 の 効 率 制 度 、そして カルチャー に よっ て 違 う わけ よ。だから 一 律 に ね 、これ を 地 球 強 で ワクチン を 進め る と いう の は 、これ は 遺 伝 子 ワクチン に あ ろう が な かろう が それ は ちょっと お か し い と 思い ます。 天 然 痘 の ワクチン で 成 功 し た 方 が ね 、コロナ の ワクチン で 同 じ よう に 成 功 する と は 限ら な い し 、 ま し て イン フル エン ザ で も 全 然 成 功 なんか し て な い わけ です し 。 日本 で も もう す で に 何十 年 も 前 に イン フル エン ザ ワクチン は 無 効 で ある と いう レ ポート が 出 て る に も かかわら ず ワクチン の 生 成 等 を 進め た り し た り し て る わけ です が、やっぱり 狂 っ て ます よ 。これ は もう 科 学 で は なく て ね 信 仰 、あるいは 邪 教 ある い は も っ て 言っ て し ま う と カント と 言っ て も い い です ね 。私は そこ ま で 思い ます。 です けど も ワクチン に つい て 反 対 する と ね ガリ レオ の 至ら な し い も の じゃ ある ま い し ね 。まる で ね 、異 教 徒 扱 い に なる わけですよ 。これ は ね 狂 っ て ます。 W HO に そ ん だけ の 能 力 は な い は ず な ん です よ 。だから ワクチン で 被 害 を 受け た こと 、W HO も 分かっ て る から 、その 根 本 制 度 する た め に W HO も い く つ か の 目 に 対 し て 、 デベロップメント 関 東 に 対 し て です ね 、被害 救 済 制 度 を W HO が 提 供 する と 、ヨーロッパ も アメリカ 中国 、日本 も 韓国 も です ね 被 害 者 に 救 済 制 度 を 持っ て ます から 、それ に リ ペン ド オン に し て ね 、生産 物 責 任 を 我 々 が 要 求 で き な い よう な こと は 絶 対 お か し い と いう ふう に 私 は 思い ます し 、 ナマステ で それ だけ の 能 力 を 持ち る は ず が な い 。それ だけ の サイエンス の ベース を W HO は 一 切 持っ て ませ ん が 、すごく 無 敵 。 各 国 政 府 は こ の W HO に 判 断 を 乱 れる こと は し て は い け な い と いう の が 私 の 基 本 です 。基本 的 な し です。 ここ に いる き くち も こ の ファースト 論 文 の 誤 差 です けど も 、彼 が ま と め た 論 文 は イス ラ エル と パ レス ティナ ヨルダン 、 シリア 、そして エジプト 比較 し て 、イスラエル が 最 も たくさ ん ワクチン を 早期 に 世界 に 先 駆 け て 打っ た 国 だ けど 、一番 たくさ ん 死 亡 者 出 し た の は イス ラ エル だ し 、そして 一 番 たくさ ん 感 染
Speaker 1: 者 出 し た
Speaker 0: の は イス ラ エル で 、ワクチン あ まり せっせと 駐 車 で き なかっ た ところ は そんな に 被 害 を 受け て なかっ た ん です よ 。 イス ラ エル が い ち 早く ワクチン は 辞 め た っ て です ね 。だから こう いう 事 実 、今 全 世界 W HO が 全 世界 の そ の ワクチン 接種 の アウト 株 に つい て 、そして そ の 被 害 に つい て 、ダメージ に つい て DEF I CT に つい て W HO が 責 任 持っ て 調査 し て 、報告 書 を 出す べ き 。これ は W HO に 私 は 、 強行 に 要 求 し た い と 思い ます 。 W HO それ を せ ず に 、しかも 遺伝 子 ワクチン な ん て 全 く の クソ です よ 。 遺 伝 子 を 人 の 中 に 導 入 する っ て 遺 伝 子 治 療 で しょう ね。 そんな も の ワクチン に し て どう する の っ て こと ですよね 。これ メッセージ の 名 を 中 に ナ ノ ターン の ところ に 踏 まえ て 投与 し た ら ね な ん て いう の か な 蓋 を 上げ て いる 人 ば かり は です よ 。 で 、事実 、卵 巣 を は じめ 、脳 に も それ から 感 動 に も 脾 臓 に も 、 骨髄 に も 、一番 問 題 は 骨髄 に 行 く と いう と、それ から 卵 巣 が そう いう リ プロ ダ ッキー オー ガ に 行 く ということ ね 。もう あり と あ ら ゆ る 臓 器 に それ が 行き 渡 る 、しかも それ が です ね 、1 年 以上 経っ て も ね でき た 皮 脂 の 中 に ス パー グ タンパク が 検 出さ れる と いう 。これ ス パー グ タンパク 作っ て る 決まっ て ます よ 、この 本 当 は 。その ス パー グ タンパク が そこ の ところ で 、1 年 前 も 残っ て て ね、それ で 染色 さ れる っ て こと は な い 。これ 新 た に 出 し た 日 本 の 高知 大 学 の サン プロ セ ッサ ー 産 の 論 文 です けど ね 。こう いう こと も 分かっ て き て る わけですよ 。そし て こう いう 論 文 も き ち っ と 精 査 し た く れ て 、 宅 配 置 法 が と に か く 推進 し た ん だ から 、この 島 は W HO が チケット 的 か と いう の が 私
Speaker 1: の 見 て い ます
Speaker 0: 。まあ ふざけん な ということ です 、これ ね。 科 学 の 乱 用 を 悪用 、 e - b el 、 クラッチ s を 算定 し て い く 。 私 は 2 歳 児 な ら ば か ま か し っ て 売 っ て な い から イン フレ な ら っ て 持 た な い し 、 も ちゃ は こんな も の も 馬 鹿 みたい だ な と 思っ て ま し た から 。だから こんな も 売 っ て な い 。だけど これ で 被 害 を 受け た 人 を ね 、赤ちゃん を 残し て ね 、28 歳 男 性 死ん じゃ っ た ん です よ 。 朝 行っ た ら 奥 さ ん が 死ん で る の を 見 つけ た 。 冗 談 じゃ な い で しょ 、こんな こと 起 こ す わっ て 一 年 死ん だ だけ で 持っ て い け た 。 ところ が 日 本 の 場合 、死亡 と か 二千 何百 も ある ん です よ 。 二千 何百 も 死ん だ の も ある
Speaker 1: ん です
Speaker 0: よ 。 ワクチン で 死ん だ ん です よ 、それ は 。これ 2 3 4 件 の 死 亡 霊 。これ は ね 、私 が 集 計 し た ん じゃ な い 。政府 が ちゃん と 報 告 を 受け て ネット に 上げ て いる 価 値 です 。これ は 死 亡 例 です ね。 今 も っ て 医 師 に 語 ら な い と い け な い 人 が 何 万 人 も いる ん です よ 。その うち の 30 は 慢性 表彰 工 具 です よ 。まだ 決 着 が つい て な い 需要 です 。これ に 対 し て ビ タミン D が どう も 効果 が ある ということ を 我 々 の 仲 間 が 見 つけ て 、今 論 文 を 撮影 中 です。 この 被 害 と 我 々 は 本 当 に ね 真剣 に こ の 取り組ま な きゃ い け な い わけですよ 。この 被 害 を なかっ た こと に し よう な っ て いう よう な 動き
Speaker 1: は ね
Speaker 0: 、それ は 悪魔 の 所 業 です と か ね 。だから EV O プラクティス の 原 型 です 。私たち は 、あらゆる 疾 患 を パンドラ の 箱 を 開け た よう に 我 々 は あ ら ゆ る 疾 患 に 遭 遇 し て いる わけ
Speaker 1: です よ
Speaker 0: 。もう 自己 免 疫 疾 患 、神経 変 性 疾 患 、 が ん 、それ から 感 染 、こう いう 風 に 全 部 に 対 し て 、それ が ね 、しかも 気 象 難 病 ま で ね レア サラダ ジ ップ ディ ジ デス 。 希少 性 、気象 の 難 病 ま で ね 、 怒っ て る。 聞い た こと の な い 病 気 ま で 一 緒 に し ま し た が
Speaker 1: て い ます 。 と あ の
Speaker 0: リ ピー ト 7 % で ぐるっ て いう タイプ の 今 回 の T DS は 全 く の 失 敗 です 。だから こ の ワクチン は 初め から イン ス・ セプション 、それ から なんて 言 う の か な 、あの ミス コン ダ クト 、そして P B lu c id th of science to tal y Re v ect is と それ から あ の な ん て 言 う の か な 、トー タリー ファー ネス プロ ダクション ということ だ と 思い ます ね 。私は ここ ま で 薬 剤 疫学 の 日 本 で 初め て 作っ た 人 間 と し て 責 任 が ある から ね 。私は もう リ タイ ア し た 人 間 です だけ ど 研究 所 主 催 し て る し 、サ エン ス は 自 分 の 家 業 だ っ た ん です 。自分 の ミッション と し て 続け て る わけ です けど だけ ど やっぱり ね 、ここ へ 来 て 、みんな が ね 、 ヒル 、 サイエンス が 怯 ん で し か も ね 、 カレッジ やっ て 検閲 を し て る わけですよ 。これ サイエンス コミュニティ の 崩 壊 です よ 、大 半 です よ こんな こと が
Speaker 1: あっ て
Speaker 0: は な ら な い 。もう 一 度 もう 正 面 から こ の サイエンス に 光 る わけ な い と い け な い から 、W HO は 、この 世界 で 初め て 人 類 に 使っ た 大 規 模 に 使っ た そ の 遺 伝 子 ワクチン に つい て 、 Comp re hen s ive な out come リサーチ を 指 示 する べ き
Speaker 1: で 学校
Speaker 0: は それ に 協 力 する べ き です 。もう こう いう よう な ワクチン を 使 う ということ は 二 度 と あっ て な ら ん です 。これ は もう 人 類 も ね 、あの シェ リ 、 恥 です。 こんな こと やっ が ある 。 私 は そこ に 聞 け 言
Speaker 1: い ます っ て
Speaker 0: ね 、本気 で 。ここ ま で 本 気 で 今 ま で ずっと 控 え て た けど 、これ は 国 際 的 な 問 題 です か 。 成 長 を 使っ た ら ん で き て ね 、ああ いう あ ん な よう な 社 会 で ね サイエンス を 持て余 す ん で は い か ん です よ 。 頑固 と は サイエンス が 妥 協 し た ら 終 わり な ん です
Prof Fukushima addresses MHLW in the House of Councillors
A meeting was arranged in the House of Councillors in late Nov 2022 between mRNA vaccine victims and MHLW officials. The main speaker is Prof. Masanori Fukushima, MD PhD, an emeritus Professor of Kyoto University. A resume of the speaker is available here https://www.phys.sinica.edu.tw/~tywufund/download/camp/2019/cv/cv_camp2019_MasanoriFukushima.pdf
synctia.u-aizu.ac.jp
reSee.it AI Summary
Received 100+ tweets about Dr. David Fisman on X. Fisman sat on the 'Science Table' during the pandemic and receives funding from Moderna and Pfizer. Questioning his credibility as an unbiased expert. No opinions or biases added. #DavidFisman #ArrestDavidFisman #FismansFraud
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Here's the 100+ Fisman tweets I received from all of you out there on X. Great work everyone 👏 As you watch, keep in mind the fact that Dr. David Fisman sat on the 'Science Table' during the 'pandemic'. Also, both Fisman and UofT receive funding from Moderna and Pfizer. Does this man sound like the sort of 'Expert' you'd trust to provide Canadians with unbiased sound 'scientific' advice? @KarlDHarrison @rupasubramanya @jordanbpeterson @ABridgen @ConradMBlack @WoodReporting @ReginaWatteel @stkirsch @NChartierET @TuckerCarlson @rustyrockets @ConradMBlack @TheRedactedInc @natalimorris @thevivafrei @elonmusk @RandPaul @RWMaloneMD @joerogan @Jim_Jordan @SenRonJohnson @P_McCulloughMD @naomirwolf @ColinCarrieCPC @LeslynLewis @PierrePoilievre #DavidFisman #ArrestDavidFisman #FismansFraud
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*BREAKING* "Trudeau caught using fraudulent data to impose lockdowns and tyrannical mandates on Canadians" Bombshell interview with our friend, Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of the bestselling book Fisman's Fraud: https://amzn.to/47X11iu @jordanbpeterson @TuckerCarlson @WoodReporting @KarlDHarrison @ConradMBlack @brianlilley @rupasubramanya @NChartierET @nationalpost @globalnews @CBC @CTVNews @CP24 @TheTorontoSun
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the video, Dr. Regina Wateel discusses her book, "Fisman's Fraud," which exposes the misinformation and fraudulent science used to implement pandemic policies in Canada. She highlights how a study claiming that the unvaccinated were responsible for the ongoing pandemic was based on a mathematical model rather than actual population data. Dr. Wateel expresses her frustration with the media for not questioning the study and the politicians for using it to justify strict restrictions and vaccine mandates. She also uncovers conflicts of interest, such as the lead author's ties to Moderna and the university's partnership with the pharmaceutical company. Dr. Wateel emphasizes the negative impact of these policies on individuals and calls for grassroots movements to address the issue.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And tortured the unvaccinated based on hate science, which is not science at all. That is what one author says in her new book, Fisman's Fraud. Doctor Regina Wateel joins us today. She's a Canadian statistician who took the time to read the studies that the media and the Canadian government was using to implement pandemic policy, and she found she could not, in fact, follow the science no no matter how hard she tried. Thank you so much for joining me today.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Glad to be here.
Speaker 0: Yes. I finished your book over the weekend, and I want to lay this out briefly so that our audience explains how you got there and just how serious this is in terms of academic misinformation. So in 2022, Canada insisted on keeping strict restrictions and vaccine requirements on its population even though the science was beginning to show that the vaccine did not impact the transmission of COVID. And then right on cue, this study pops up saying that the unvaccinated are a threat to the vaccinated and responsible for the pandemic raging on. The media picks it up.
Politicians use it to implement policy. It's a big hit. But you, in fact, read it and realized that it's not based on population data, which was available, but instead a mathematical model, and you hit the roof. You became what I call a dog with a bone. I love it.
You went to the journal, the university, and even the police to point out this fraud. So take me through it, how you got here, and why it set your hair on fire so much.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, the problem well, the big part of the the reason why I went after this is because my family was really impacted by the mandates and the restrictions. So In the fall of 2021, what we had here in Canada, we had a vaccine passports. So the, unvaccinated were banned from most public venues, you know, restaurants, gyms, movie theatres. The universities, were most of them were, in order for university students to go on campus, they had to be vaccinated.
And then the federal government had its vaccine mandates, on federal workers. So in order to work, they had to be vaccinated, isolating and very hard time for 1,000,000 of Canadians. And then what happened in December at Christmas of 2021 is we had Omicron surge. And so the COVID-nineteen cases soared to record heights the vaccine. 80% of the population was vaccinated still we had these record surges.
Not only in in in cases but in hospitalizations 22 and at the time they were even imposed additional restrictions on unvaccinated truckers. So the world recalls that that sparked the the trucker convoy, the freedom convoy. And so The freedom convoy came in and it put a lot of pressure on the provinces to relent on their passports and on the federal government to end their mandates and, travel restrictions. So out of desperation, the federal government government, imposed the Emergencies Act where they basically trampled on the protesters and froze bank accounts and that type of thing In order to you know stop the momentum in order to salvage their restrictions. But they needed to do more.
They needed the science largest province here in Canada. When you look at our data, the government's own data, it showed that the cases, the COVID cases were dominated by the vaccinated, and that the vaccinated actually had higher incident rates than the unvaccinated. So, yeah, Trudeau was in desperate need of of science and justification for his mandates. So in comes, Fisman and his colleagues. And what Fisman does is is he can he he and his colleagues concoct a model to simulate fake data that shows the opposite of what real data shows.
Fake data that shows that it's the unvaccinated that have higher, COVID 19 rates. And then he tried to pass off their their fake results as fact. And they use this, you know, fake results to to scapegoat the unvaccinated, to, provide justification for the federal government's mandates and restrictions, and then media ran with it. Media ran with it, warning everybody of the risk of merely hanging out with unvaccinated Canadians.
Speaker 0: Which is so upsetting because if you look at the study, they don't even use COVID 19 data at all. They say we simulated a respiratory infectious disease. And so the media should have known this is a simulation. They didn't seem to care. They just started running headlines that you you put a compendium in your book of the list of headlines about how, you're putting people at risk by going to the gym, or getting on a train, or an airplane, or anything like that.
So, you know, it's it's a complete lack of duty by the media, but we sort of expect that. But the politicians who used it to implement policy is, I wanna say, more upsetting. UCM has set by all of it, so you can tell me what you find the
Speaker 1: most upsetting. Well, right away, when I looked at the study, I I was well aware of what the data actually showed. So I knew right away that that it was it was bogus. But it just wasn't going away. Everybody was running with it, and it was so clearly fraudulent.
What I found most, the worst was when the, the academic institutions, the research institutions would not retract the study or set the record straight. They allowed it to continue, and and it and that's really when I when I realized how corrupted the system is. It's not just the government here. You know, the government is like Trudeau's government is is there's a scandal every hour. It's terrible.
And unfortunately, the courts are are more than happy to look the other way. But what my by going through all the, you know, trying to get the paper retracted and going through the different organizations, I realized think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, to scapegoat the unvaccinated, and prop up these these horrible mandates. And and they knew and they did nothing. And and in fact, when you look at their involvement, especially the journal, it looked like they were actively involved in that deception.
Speaker 0: Right. So you uncovered that the lead author, Bismond, has been on the payroll of Moderna and was given promotions, so was the university that, published the paper. They were later given money by the Canadian government in order to continue to research the pandemic. Can you explain that conflict of interest and how that was not disclosed to the public?
Speaker 1: Well, actually, a lot of these conflicts of interest are very public. So you look at, David Fisman, and he's basically Canada's, front man for pandemic modelling. So he was involved in government, you know, municipal, provincial, federal. And, during this time, he has a lot of connections to various pharmaceutical companies. He he served on a lot of advisory boards, and the university itself, University of Toronto, was in partnership with Moderna.
They announced a big partnership with Moderna weeks before FISMA study came out. And they've, you know, all universities here a lot of universities in Canada received a lot of grant money from the government to combat things like vaccine hesitancy. So these things are pretty well known here. It's it's pretty open conflict of interest.
Speaker 0: Now you went bit by bit to people to get this retracted to the medical journal, the University of Toronto, I believe, and even the fraud department, the I guess you would call it the Canadian version of the FBI. Right? Can you tell us what happened at each one of those?
Speaker 1: Right. So first, I went to the the journal because they published the study, and I asked for a retraction. And the journal was it wasn't just me who went the journal. Dozens of of researchers and scientists in Canada asked for corrections to be made in that paper to be retracted. But, they pretty much ignored me.
So I went to the University of Toronto, and University of Toronto has its own department for dealing with, research integrity, so they had to answer, you know, they had to engage in dialogue with me. And at first, they just tried to deny that they they, could deal with what FISMA did. So I actually had to go through their guidelines, research guidelines, and show them exactly in the policy where it shows they have to do something. And then they just try to deflect it. And then when I, you know, I went back to them, absolute proof this was fraud, backed them into a corner, and they just closed the file.
So at that point, I went to the funding agency because this this research was funded by the Canadian government. It was funded through CIHR. So I asked them to investigate the researchers and to set the record straight because it had been used in our parliament to justify extending the travel restrictions. And what happened with, with CIHR is the President of CIHR along with the Presidents of NSERC and and and and another department, they got together, and they they they voted not to set the record straight and to not investigate. And at that point, I had been doing a lot of research into these organizations, and I felt I had enough evidence to ask for a a police investigation.
So I wrote a 150 page evidentiary report, and I sent it to the Ontario Provincial Police, their anti branch and asked for an investigation. So we were not open to that.
Speaker 0: Yes. You mentioned that you the person you sat down with said, I've had 4 vaccines. I'm fine. Everyone's fine. This is not a big deal.
So can you lay out why this was a big deal? And that not just, oh, I couldn't go to the gym, but how there are recurring harms that happened. 1, because, the vaccine was not properly tested, and so we didn't have a risk benefit analysis of taking the vaccine. We didn't have vaccine. We didn't have informed consent.
And 2, because of the way that the unvaccinated were scapegoated and kept from their freedom.
Speaker 1: Right. So there's a lot to unpack there because the vaccines there there's there's issues with them on a lot of levels. So Bismond's study dealt mostly with transmission. And so I my book does not that down a lot because it was obvious it doesn't curtail transmission at all. And without that, there's really is no justification for mandates.
And I go with that because if you have a potentially unsafe drug on the market, a potentially lethal, you know, drug. The the best line of defense is to simply not take it. So if they take that right away and you're forced to take it, then you really don't have, you know, any defense against this. So in Canada, they made life unbearable for the unvaccinated. It wasn't just I couldn't go to the movies, and I couldn't go to the gym, or my kids, you know, couldn't go to restaurants.
My 2 oldest were in university at the time and they were varsity level athletes. Both of them were banned from the university campus. They were both kicked out of varsity sports. They'd never competed again. It destroyed their, their, you know, their varsity sports completely.
And they were big athletes. They made it to nationals right before the pandemic was called. My youngest was isolated from everything. My husband, he's a federal employee, so the mandates affected him. And and and so he didn't work for most of 2022.
My sister, she got fired from her position as a heart technician. I mean, it was devastating. And, it completely changed our life, but not just our life, like, you know, millions of people suffered under this and are still suffering. And when I went to, like, I took part in in the the Chukar convoy, I went to that protest, like, 13 times. It was it was so uplifting because you had so many people together who finally had hope, you know, that that something was going to be done.
And I met a lot of people who suffered. I I met people who were vaccinated and and and they were injured. And, you know, a lot of stories came out of that. So it was it was it was devastating. It's been very difficult here in Canada.
And FISMAN study sorry. Do you wanna
Speaker 0: No. No. Go ahead. Please go ahead.
Speaker 1: I was just saying that that FISMAN study didn't just scapegoat the unvaccinated. It didn't just, justify the mandates that were happening at the time. You could see that it was laying down the foundation, for for, you know, future mandates. It was giving you the framework for the pseudo science as to why, we should be able to mandate vaccines, not just now, but in the future. And I found that so I feel I have to do something in order for my children to have a future here.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. You I wanna ask you one more question, and then I want to direct our, our viewers to this will continue as a redacted conversation over on our community at redacted.inc. I want you to just, before we continue this conversation, define what you mean by hate science and what you think that the average person can do about it.
Speaker 1: So hate science, I'm I'm looking at, you know, fraudulent science done for the purpose of of harming a specific, group of of individuals. So in this case, we had, the fabric fabrication and falsification for the purpose of scapegoating unvaccinated Canadians and and basically, taken away their rights and freedoms. So that was the purpose behind the science.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And and what we can do about it, well, what I've shown, and it's pretty clear here is that the establishment is not going to investigate itself. The establishment is not going to stop doing what it's doing. So I think it's up to, individuals and gas grassroots movements to to do something about what is going on here. So I'm kind of hoping that my book, you know, exposes what's going on, but also gives people a sense of, you know, validation and empowerment to do something the way the way I have.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's a really interesting read. I think that anyone who's interested in understanding how we've been collectively manipulated, Canada, one of the worst, will enjoy this book. So thank you for writing it and bringing it to my attention. We're gonna continue this over on, as a redacted conversation.
So, on this live platform tonight, I'm gonna thank you for joining us, and then we'll continue the conversation after the show. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Thank you.
Speaker 2: I really hoped you enjoyed watching this video. You know, YouTube thinks that you'll actually like this next video right here. It's personalized based on your own viewing habits. So if you watch the video, please leave a comment. Let us know what you think about it.
And we will see you next time, everyone.
Speaker 0: It's meeting your new family doctor and feeling at ease. It's seeing your grand
Amazon.com
amazon.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING - "Pfizer ‘Chose Not to’ Tell Regulators About SV40 Sequence In Covid Shots: Health Canada Official" This is a recording of the audio version of the report for those who do not subscribe to Epoch Times. Full print article by @NChartierET here:
Video Transcript AI Summary
Pfizer did not disclose SV40 DNA in COVID vaccine to regulators, causing concern among Health Canada officials. The presence of SV40 DNA was confirmed by Pfizer but not shared with FDA, EMA, or HC initially. Despite claims that the DNA fragment is inactive and below regulatory limits, concerns remain about potential risks. Health Canada is working with international partners to address the issue for future vaccine strains. The focus seems to be on vaccine acceptance rather than addressing health risks associated with DNA contamination. Pfizer has not responded to requests for comment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Pfizer chose not to tell regulators about SV 40 sequence in COVID shots. Health Canada official. A senior Health Canada official says pharma giant Pfizer made a conscious decision to not advise regulators that its mRNA COVID-nineteen vaccine contained a DNA sequence from the simian virus 40. This information appears among multiple emails between staff from key drug regulators, including Health Canada, the US Food and Drugs Administration, and the European Medicines Agency. The information was obtained through an access to information request.
On August 23, 2023, Doctor. Dean Smith, a senior scientific evaluator in HC's vaccine quality division, wrote an email to a colleague at the FDA about SV40. Health Canada had obtained confirmation 2 weeks earlier from Pfizer that s v 40 DNA sequences were present in its COVID 19 vaccine. I understand that there have been internal discussions at CBER regarding the presence of an SV40 enhancerpromoter sequence, noting that its presence is unrelated to the purpose of the Pfizer's plasmid as a transcription template for their mRNA COVID-nineteen vaccine, wrote Doctor. Smith.
Pfizer has communicated to us recently that they apparently chose not to mention this information to EMA, FDA or HC at the time of their initial or subsequent submissions. Doctor. Smith added the information had been independently made public in April 2023, via a preprint study from US scientist Kevin McKernan. Mr. McKernan, a genomics expert, had found quantities of DNA in the mRNA shots above the regulatory threshold set out by the health agencies.
Doctor Smith wrote that the study had resulted in questions coming to agencies. The Epic Times had contacted HC on the matter on July 17th. The first email related to s v 40 within Health Canada released in the access to information package was sent 2 days later, on July 19th. In that email, doctor Tong Wu of HC's Vaccine Quality Division reached out to his colleague doctor Michael Wall, a senior biologist evaluator. Co agreed to have an IAS for the SV 40 promoter sequence as we discussed today.
We can talk about it tomorrow, doctor Wu wrote. IAS could be a reference to an issue analysis summary to evaluate a new regulatory affair. As first reported by the EPIC Times in October, Health Canada was not aware of the SV40 enhancer presence. Since then, the FDA and the EMA have both confirmed they also weren't aware of its presence. Health Canada has since maintained that the SV40 enhancerpromoter sequence is a residual DNA fragment in Pfizer BioNTech COVID-nineteen vaccine.
The fragment is inactive, has no functional role, and was measured to be consistently below the limit required by Health Canada and other international regulators, the agency has repeatedly said. 0 checks. This view has been challenged by Mr. McKernan and others, including Doctor. Philip Buck Holtz, professor of cancer genomics and director of the cancer genetics lab at the University of South Carolina.
In response to the information released by Health Canada, mister McKernan posted a thread on the X platform. No prior vaccine in Canada has been approved with such a sequence contaminant, he said. Pfizer assured the sequence he added. Resistance. If it's not needed, why is it in there?
Mister McKernan also noted how HC has asked Pfizer for its polymerase chain reaction protocol, saying this means they have performed 0 checks on this DNA contamination themselves and are entirely relying on the word of the manufacturer. A response to a Canadian member of parliament's question tabled in the House of Commons by Health Canada appears to be lined with this observation. It is important to assess the results using the validated assays performed by the vaccine manufacturers to ensure that the quality of commercial vaccine lots are comparable to lots shown to be safe and efficacious in clinical studies, said Health Canada in December. Concerns related to the presence of unintended DNA in the mRNA shots pertain to their potential to integrate into the human genome and cause issues like cancer. The Florida state surgeon general Doctor.
Joseph A. Laddapo has called for a halt of mRNA shots over these risks. Health Canada said in March in a document tabled Doctor. Buchholz has started a scientific study to ascertain those integration risks. On April 23rd, he wrote on X that he had confirmed previous findings that the amount of DNA in mRNA shots exceeds the limit set by regulators.
Yes, there was more than 10 ingdose. I am sure of it now, he wrote while posting his methodology. This is the same threshold applied by Health Canada. Even if the amount of DNA was below, there are still concerns the threshold was set for regular vaccines and not the new technology using lipid nano particles. Doctor.
Buckholtz wrote that the tanning limit is not appropriate for LNP encapsulated DNA, adding that as far as I know there have been no safety studies authorization. Seeking remedy. In his August 23 email to the FDA employee, Doctor. Smith said, H Canada did not view the SV 40 issues as an urgent risk topic. However, the official responsible for evaluating the safety of vaccines expressed concerns about how news of the SV40 could impact the upcoming fall 2023 vaccination campaign.
It would be unfortunate if the information circulating had a negatively impact on public acceptance of the vaccine this year or in the future, he said. Despite being of this view, Doctor Smith said regulating agencies should work to encourage Pfizer to remedy the situation before the campaign. In the email, Doctor. Smith said H. C.
Believed the upcoming rollout of the fall COVID nineteen vaccine campaign meant the agencies should be on the same page. Mister Smith's email was written a day after Pfizer provided a response to a quality clarifact submitted by HC around the SV 40 promoter. If deficiencies are identified in clinical trial applications, HC may request additional information, which is known as a Clarifax. On August 29th, HC senior biologist Doctor. Wahl wrote an email senior evaluator doctor Tong Wu, where he said he and mister Smith agreed they should not inform Pfizer of their interaction with the EMA and US FDA on the SV40 promoter, especially they do not seem to care much at this moment.
However, we can not say nothing. Please see the following text that Julie and I worked out, Mr. Wahl added, before providing a draft comment to Pfizer's response that was blacked out. The same day, Doctor. Wahl also sent an email to Doctor.
Wu with a draft of the clarifax questions to be sent to Pfizer, which included the statement, Health Canada would continue to work with international regulatory partners to achieve harmonization regarding removal of these sequence elements from the plasmid for future strain changes. Pfizer did not respond to a request for comment from The Epoch Times. Commenting on DNA contamination, Health Canada reiterated its previous position on the matter. Based on its evaluation of the data and scientific information for the vaccine, Health Canada has concluded that the riskbenefit profile continues to support the use of the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, said spokesperson Anna Madison. Doctor David Spiker, a Canadian virologist who replicated the findings from mister McKernan and Doctor.
Buckholz with Canadian mRNA vials, told The Epoch Times he's preoccupied about what's been revealed in the internal Health Canada emails. He notes that while Health Canada has dismissed the DNA fragments as biologically inactive with no functional role, they judged worthy to hold discussions with other regulators. We know from testing several vials that the level of SV 40 enhancer promoter in the XBB.1.5 booster is at similar levels as the others Pfizer COVID mod RNA vaccines, making it just as problematic, he says. Pfizer has not cleaned up the vaccine, yet the regulators are sadly more concerned about vaccine uptake in the population rather than the health risks from these vaccines.
@NChartierET - Noé Chartier
Pfizer ‘Chose Not to’ Tell Regulators About SV40 Sequence In Covid Shots: Health Canada Official "Pfizer has communicated to us recently, that they apparently chose not to mention this information to EMA, FDA or HC..." https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/pfizer-chose-not-to-tell-regulators-about-sv40-sequence-in-covid-shots-health-canada-official-5635787
Pfizer ‘Chose Not to’ Tell Regulators About SV40 Sequence In Covid Shots: Health Canada Official
theepochtimes.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Thanks to you incredible people, here's all the Tweets that we have so far. I'll re-edit and post a better quality video as soon as the posts stop coming with more tweets. For now, if you're on a PC, or even a phone, click full screen to watch. #DavidFisman #ArrestDavidFisman https://t.co/BEn9mqsbfa
reSee.it AI Summary
Dr. David Fisman is allegedly deleting controversial posts. Help by sharing screenshots of incriminating content. One specific post of interest has already been deleted. Please repost and share widely. Thank you.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
VERY IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT - It appears that Dr. David Fisman is deleting controversial/incriminating content/posts from his X/Twitter feed. Here's how you can help - If you have screenshots of any incriminating/controversial content/posts that #DavidFisman has made over the past 4 years, please post them here as a comment and we will catalogue them to present as evidence. One particular post we are interested in which he recently deleted reads like this: "Upset about poor COVID vaccine uptake? Me too. Blame an anti-vaxxer." *Please repost this and share it widely on all of your other SM accounts - Thank you. @ReginaWatteel @KarlDHarrison @stkirsch @NChartierET @rupasubramanya @jordanbpeterson @TuckerCarlson @rustyrockets @ConradMBlack @TheRedactedInc @natalimorris @WoodReporting @thevivafrei @elonmusk @RandPaul @RWMaloneMD @joerogan @Jim_Jordan @SenRonJohnson @P_McCulloughMD
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*BREAKING* "Trudeau caught using fraudulent data to impose lockdowns and tyrannical mandates on Canadians" Bombshell interview with our friend, Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of the bestselling book Fisman's Fraud: https://amzn.to/47X11iu @jordanbpeterson @TuckerCarlson @WoodReporting @KarlDHarrison @ConradMBlack @brianlilley @rupasubramanya @NChartierET @nationalpost @globalnews @CBC @CTVNews @CP24 @TheTorontoSun
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the video, Dr. Regina Wateel discusses her book, "Fisman's Fraud," which exposes the misinformation and fraudulent science surrounding COVID-19 policies in Canada. She highlights how a study claiming that the unvaccinated were responsible for the ongoing pandemic was based on a mathematical model rather than actual population data. Despite numerous requests for retraction, the study was not corrected, and the media and politicians used it to justify strict restrictions and vaccine mandates. Dr. Wateel also uncovers conflicts of interest, such as the lead author's ties to Moderna and the university's partnership with the company. She emphasizes the devastating impact these policies had on individuals and calls for grassroots movements to address the corruption.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And tortured the unvaccinated based on hate science, which is not science at all. That is what one author says in her new book, Fisman's Fraud. Doctor Regina Wateel joins us today. She's a Canadian statistician who took the time to read the studies that the media and the Canadian government was using to implement pandemic policy, and she found she could not, in fact, follow the science no no matter how hard she tried. Thank you so much for joining me today.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Glad to be here.
Speaker 0: Yes. I finished your book over the weekend, and I want to lay this out briefly so that our audience explains how you got there and just how serious this is in terms of academic misinformation. So in 2022, Canada insisted on keeping strict restrictions and vaccine requirements on its population even though the science was beginning to show that the vaccine did not impact the transmission of COVID. And then right on cue, this study pops up saying that the unvaccinated are a threat to the vaccinated and responsible for the pandemic raging on. The media picks it up.
Politicians use it to implement policy. It's a big hit. But you, in fact, read it and realized that it's not based on population data, which was available, but instead a mathematical model, and you hit the roof. You became what I call a dog with a bone. I love it.
You went to the journal, the university, and even the police to point out this fraud. So take me through it, how you got here, and why it set your hair on fire so much.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, the problem well, the big part of the the reason why I went after this is because my family was really impacted by the mandates and the restrictions. So In the fall of 2021, what we had here in Canada, we had a vaccine passports. So the, unvaccinated were banned from most public venues, you know, restaurants, gyms, movie theatres. The universities, were most of them were, in order for university students to go on campus, they had to be vaccinated.
And then the federal government had its vaccine mandates, on federal workers. So in order to work, they had to be vaccinated, isolating and very hard time for 1,000,000 of Canadians. And then what happened in December at Christmas of 2021 is we had Omicron surge. And so the COVID-nineteen cases soared to record heights the vaccine. 80% of the population was vaccinated still we had these record surges.
Not only in in in cases but in hospitalizations 22 and at the time they were even imposed additional restrictions on unvaccinated truckers. So the world recalls that that sparked the the trucker convoy, the freedom convoy. And so The freedom convoy came in and it put a lot of pressure on the provinces to relent on their passports and on the federal government to end their mandates and, travel restrictions. So out of desperation, the federal government government, imposed the Emergencies Act where they basically trampled on the protesters and froze bank accounts and that type of thing In order to you know stop the momentum in order to salvage their restrictions. But they needed to do more.
They needed the science largest province here in Canada. When you look at our data, the government's own data, it showed that the cases, the COVID cases were dominated by the vaccinated, and that the vaccinated actually had higher incident rates than the unvaccinated. So, yeah, Trudeau was in desperate need of of science and justification for his mandates. So in comes, Fisman and his colleagues. And what Fisman does is is he can he he and his colleagues concoct a model to simulate fake data that shows the opposite of what real data shows.
Fake data that shows that it's the unvaccinated that have higher, COVID 19 rates. And then he tried to pass off their their fake results as fact. And they use this, you know, fake results to to scapegoat the unvaccinated, to, provide justification for the federal government's mandates and restrictions, and then media ran with it. Media ran with it, warning everybody of the risk of merely hanging out with unvaccinated Canadians.
Speaker 0: Which is so upsetting because if you look at the study, they don't even use COVID 19 data at all. They say we simulated a respiratory infectious disease. And so the media should have known this is a simulation. They didn't seem to care. They just started running headlines that you you put a compendium in your book of the list of headlines about how, you're putting people at risk by going to the gym, or getting on a train, or an airplane, or anything like that.
So, you know, it's it's a complete lack of duty by the media, but we sort of expect that. But the politicians who used it to implement policy is, I wanna say, more upsetting. UCM has set by all of it, so you can tell me what you find the
Speaker 1: most upsetting. Well, right away, when I looked at the study, I I was well aware of what the data actually showed. So I knew right away that that it was it was bogus. But it just wasn't going away. Everybody was running with it, and it was so clearly fraudulent.
What I found most, the worst was when the, the academic institutions, the research institutions would not retract the study or set the record straight. They allowed it to continue, and and it and that's really when I when I realized how corrupted the system is. It's not just the government here. You know, the government is like Trudeau's government is is there's a scandal every hour. It's terrible.
And unfortunately, the courts are are more than happy to look the other way. But what my by going through all the, you know, trying to get the paper retracted and going through the different organizations, I realized think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, to scapegoat the unvaccinated, and prop up these these horrible mandates. And and they knew and they did nothing. And and in fact, when you look at their involvement, especially the journal, it looked like they were actively involved in that deception.
Speaker 0: Right. So you uncovered that the lead author, Bismond, has been on the payroll of Moderna and was given promotions, so was the university that, published the paper. They were later given money by the Canadian government in order to continue to research the pandemic. Can you explain that conflict of interest and how that was not disclosed to the public?
Speaker 1: Well, actually, a lot of these conflicts of interest are very public. So you look at, David Fisman, and he's basically Canada's, front man for pandemic modelling. So he was involved in government, you know, municipal, provincial, federal. And, during this time, he has a lot of connections to various pharmaceutical companies. He he served on a lot of advisory boards, and the university itself, University of Toronto, was in partnership with Moderna.
They announced a big partnership with Moderna weeks before FISMA study came out. And they've, you know, all universities here a lot of universities in Canada received a lot of grant money from the government to combat things like vaccine hesitancy. So these things are pretty well known here. It's it's pretty open conflict of interest.
Speaker 0: Now you went bit by bit to people to get this retracted to the medical journal, the University of Toronto, I believe, and even the fraud department, the I guess you would call it the Canadian version of the FBI. Right? Can you tell us what happened at each one of those?
Speaker 1: Right. So first, I went to the the journal because they published the study, and I asked for a retraction. And the journal was it wasn't just me who went the journal. Dozens of of researchers and scientists in Canada asked for corrections to be made in that paper to be retracted. But, they pretty much ignored me.
So I went to the University of Toronto, and University of Toronto has its own department for dealing with, research integrity, so they had to answer, you know, they had to engage in dialogue with me. And at first, they just tried to deny that they they, could deal with what FISMA did. So I actually had to go through their guidelines, research guidelines, and show them exactly in the policy where it shows they have to do something. And then they just try to deflect it. And then when I, you know, I went back to them, absolute proof this was fraud, backed them into a corner, and they just closed the file.
So at that point, I went to the funding agency because this this research was funded by the Canadian government. It was funded through CIHR. So I asked them to investigate the researchers and to set the record straight because it had been used in our parliament to justify extending the travel restrictions. And what happened with, with CIHR is the President of CIHR along with the Presidents of NSERC and and and and another department, they got together, and they they they voted not to set the record straight and to not investigate. And at that point, I had been doing a lot of research into these organizations, and I felt I had enough evidence to ask for a a police investigation.
So I wrote a 150 page evidentiary report, and I sent it to the Ontario Provincial Police, their anti branch and asked for an investigation. So we were not open to that.
Speaker 0: Yes. You mentioned that you the person you sat down with said, I've had 4 vaccines. I'm fine. Everyone's fine. This is not a big deal.
So can you lay out why this was a big deal? And that not just, oh, I couldn't go to the gym, but how there are recurring harms that happened. 1, because, the vaccine was not properly tested, and so we didn't have a risk benefit analysis of taking the vaccine. We didn't have vaccine. We didn't have informed consent.
And 2, because of the way that the unvaccinated were scapegoated and kept from their freedom.
Speaker 1: Right. So there's a lot to unpack there because the vaccines there there's there's issues with them on a lot of levels. So Bismond's study dealt mostly with transmission. And so I my book does not that down a lot because it was obvious it doesn't curtail transmission at all. And without that, there's really is no justification for mandates.
And I go with that because if you have a potentially unsafe drug on the market, a potentially lethal, you know, drug. The the best line of defense is to simply not take it. So if they take that right away and you're forced to take it, then you really don't have, you know, any defense against this. So in Canada, they made life unbearable for the unvaccinated. It wasn't just I couldn't go to the movies, and I couldn't go to the gym, or my kids, you know, couldn't go to restaurants.
My 2 oldest were in university at the time and they were varsity level athletes. Both of them were banned from the university campus. They were both kicked out of varsity sports. They'd never competed again. It destroyed their, their, you know, their varsity sports completely.
And they were big athletes. They made it to nationals right before the pandemic was called. My youngest was isolated from everything. My husband, he's a federal employee, so the mandates affected him. And and and so he didn't work for most of 2022.
My sister, she got fired from her position as a heart technician. I mean, it was devastating. And, it completely changed our life, but not just our life, like, you know, millions of people suffered under this and are still suffering. And when I went to, like, I took part in in the the Chukar convoy, I went to that protest, like, 13 times. It was it was so uplifting because you had so many people together who finally had hope, you know, that that something was going to be done.
And I met a lot of people who suffered. I I met people who were vaccinated and and and they were injured. And, you know, a lot of stories came out of that. So it was it was it was devastating. It's been very difficult here in Canada.
And FISMAN study sorry. Do you wanna
Speaker 0: No. No. Go ahead. Please go ahead.
Speaker 1: I was just saying that that FISMAN study didn't just scapegoat the unvaccinated. It didn't just, justify the mandates that were happening at the time. You could see that it was laying down the foundation, for for, you know, future mandates. It was giving you the framework for the pseudo science as to why, we should be able to mandate vaccines, not just now, but in the future. And I found that so I feel I have to do something in order for my children to have a future here.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. You I wanna ask you one more question, and then I want to direct our, our viewers to this will continue as a redacted conversation over on our community at redacted.inc. I want you to just, before we continue this conversation, define what you mean by hate science and what you think that the average person can do about it.
Speaker 1: So hate science, I'm I'm looking at, you know, fraudulent science done for the purpose of of harming a specific, group of of individuals. So in this case, we had, the fabric fabrication and falsification for the purpose of scapegoating unvaccinated Canadians and and basically, taken away their rights and freedoms. So that was the purpose behind the science.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And and what we can do about it, well, what I've shown, and it's pretty clear here is that the establishment is not going to investigate itself. The establishment is not going to stop doing what it's doing. So I think it's up to, individuals and gas grassroots movements to to do something about what is going on here. So I'm kind of hoping that my book, you know, exposes what's going on, but also gives people a sense of, you know, validation and empowerment to do something the way the way I have.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's a really interesting read. I think that anyone who's interested in understanding how we've been collectively manipulated, Canada, one of the worst, will enjoy this book. So thank you for writing it and bringing it to my attention. We're gonna continue this over on, as a redacted conversation.
So, on this live platform tonight, I'm gonna thank you for joining us, and then we'll continue the conversation after the show. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Thank you.
Speaker 2: I really hoped you enjoyed watching this video. You know, YouTube thinks that you'll actually like this next video right here. It's personalized based on your own viewing habits. So if you watch the video, please leave a comment. Let us know what you think about it.
And we will see you next time, everyone.
Speaker 0: It's meeting your new family doctor and feeling at ease. It's seeing your grand
Amazon.com
amazon.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Wow that was fast! Thank you, you people are amazing, good work 😀👏 - Keep em coming, cheers!
reSee.it AI Summary
In a press conference, @PierrePoilievre presented documents alleging Trudeau's cover-up of PRC & PLA infiltration in his government. The documents also claim collaboration with Beijing organizations involved in bio-weapons and bio-terrorism. Notable figures tagged include @TuckerCarlson, @elonmusk, @rustyrockets, @ConradMBlack, @jordanbpeterson, @GBNEWS, @natalimorris, and @Telegraph.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING: @PierrePoilievre just called an urgent press conference. Shocking documents reveal Trudeau covered up massive PRC & PLA infiltration of his government, and prove that he collaborated with organizations from Beijing responsible for bio-weapons and bio-terrorism. @TuckerCarlson @elonmusk @rustyrockets @ConradMBlack @jordanbpeterson @GBNEWS @natalimorris @Telegraph
Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses a security breach at a Canadian lab where sensitive viruses were studied, involving collaboration with the People's Liberation Army of China. The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, failed to address the issue, covered it up, and even tried to buy vaccines from China. This breach poses a serious threat to national security and calls for accountability. The government's lack of transparency and respect for democracy is criticized, with a call for a conservative government to prioritize national security and prevent future breaches.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But now we know that he cannot protect our people or our country. We've just received these documents Trudeau has been covering up for years. Documents related to a massive security breach at the Trudeau Government's most sensitive laboratory, where the most dangerous viruses and pathogens are studied and handled. We have learned that the Trudeau government's head of pathogens was collaborating with members of Beijing's People's Liberation Army who are responsible for bioweapons and bioterrorism. We know now that, a People's Liberation Army official was able to gain personal access, walk in the door, look at computers, and have access to all of our most important virological secrets.
Let me if you think any of this is hyperbole, read the report yourself. This is from government documents, the Trudeau government's own documents. It says here on page 142, win Winnipeg lab scientist, doctor pathogen's unit, the top person in that job. According to documents on page 242, quote, represents a serious incredible danger to the government of Canada as a whole, and in particular at facilities considered high security due to the potential for theft of dangerous materials attractive to terrorists and foreign entities that conduct espionage damage, the economic security of Canada. End quote.
It states further on page 239, investigators assess that doctor Chu communicated with foreign entities during her trips to China. The evidence obtained from interviews and from information collected from the electronic content of her devices reveal that this is indeed the case. As a subject matter expert with access to clandestine meetings with foreign entities, end quote. Then, it says Doctor. Chu conducted joint with the major general Chen Wei of the People's Liberation Army, who according to page 236, is a noted top virologist at the academy of military medical scientists and is China's chief biologic biological defense expert engaged in research related to biosafety, biodefense, and bioterrorism.
Bioterrorism, end quote. These are deaf these are documents this is right out of the government's own documents. Trudeau, what did he do when he found out about this? Did he immediately inform Canadians get to the bottom of it? No.
He didn't do that either. Instead, he covered it all up. He defied 4 parliamentary orders to release these documents. When the speaker tried to get them, he sued the speaker to cover this up. He said it was all for national security but well we know from a committee composed of 4 members of parliament including 1 liberal and 3 judges the information appears to be mostly about protecting the organization from embarrassment for failures in policy and implementation, not legitimate national security concerns, and it's really release is essential to hold the government to account.
In other words, there was no national security reason why we couldn't have had this before. It was only because Trudeau didn't want the embarrassment before an election. So what did he do then? He collaborated knowing this. He collaborated with Beijing to buy a vaccine for COVID.
Could you imagine if the deal that Trudeau wanted to sign with Beijing had gone ahead, and we had procured China made vaccines after learning this information. That's what was in this guy's head. And if you think for a minute, because I know there'll be all kinds of excuses while he's not responsible and how could he possibly take ownership of what happens in his government. Let me quote him. It's a document called open and accountable government, and I quote, as head of government, the prime minister has special responsibilities for national security, end quote.
It's his responsibility. This is his government's lab. It's not a random university lab. It's the top lab for the prime minister's public health agency, and he is exclusively responsible for the machinery of government as Prime Minister of the country. So this is on Justin Trudeau.
I will add one last thing. Not only did he cover it up, not only did he try to get a vaccine from China after knowing this, he called a snap election to make sure that the voting would happen before this came out. And what happened in that election? Beijing interfered to help him win it. This is a man who says he admires China's basic communist dictatorship.
We cannot trust Justin Trudeau to keep our people and its country safe. We need a strong, conservative, common sense government that will root out foreign interference, protect our critical secrets, and our medical research, and stand on guard for our country to keep our people and our nation safe.
Speaker 1: Thank you. On on ArriveCAN,
Speaker 2: there is a report by CTV that says that there is a man who runs a company that got $8,000,000 for ArriveCAN. He is still employed by the Department of National Defense. What does that say to you?
Speaker 0: Says to me that there's no accountability. Now that we know this, this individual should be immediately fired, and there should be an immediate police investigation of his conduct and that of the company with which he's associated, and a broader inquiry within the public service about how this contracting was allowed to go on for so long.
Speaker 3: On the Winnipeg on
Speaker 0: the Winnipeg lab on the Winnipeg lab, do you think the National Microbiology Lab infectious disease researchers should be allowed to do any collaborations with China at this point? No. Why? Because we know that, in this instance that, there that our highest placed, most sensitive lab was infiltrated by people who collaborated with the People's Liberation Army, who did not reveal any of their ongoing partnerships with the the regime in Beijing. And, who transferred materials from our most critical lab containing our most dangerous viruses over to Beijing and to and worked in collaboration with the the Wuhan lab.
So I don't think this is the kind of collaboration we want. We should be collaborating with like minded democracies that we can touch trust not those that want to attack our interests.
Speaker 4: So as Mister Polly have this has said- the government's own documents have confirmed that the national security breaches at the Winnipeg lab represent a very serious incredible danger to Canada. And a very and a realistic incredible threat to Canada's economic security as- Mr poly have is also said. In the government's own founding document open and accountable government. The Prime Minister alone is responsible for the machinery of government and the prime minister has a special responsibility for national security. It is clear in these documents that the that the prime minister failed in his responsibility to protect the security of Canadians against a very serious threat against this country and its citizens it's also clear.
That the prime minister failed to ensure that the machine of government was set up on a way. To ensure that these kinds of things did not happen at the Winnipeg lab. In addition to all of this, what is equally appalling is the cover up. It was 3 years ago that we asked for these documents. In fact, as Mr Polley ever said.
The house of commons and its 2 committees issued for orders for the production of these documents 3 years ago. It was 4 years ago that the scientists were marched out of the lab in Winnipeg. And during these last 4 years the government covered it up. It initially as you recall, tried to punt this to the ends of cop committee. And then, it took the speaker to court.
And then it actually created this ad hoc committee of 4 MPs and 3 judges that took another year and a half to review these documents. So this has been a mass of cover up on part of this government, and it's particularly appalling in light of the fact that this is a government that came to office promising greater transparency. We have seen anything but in fact, it is been said by information commissioners that we've seen a reversal in transparency on part of this government, probably one of the worst reversals in modern Canadian government history. We've also have a government here that promised to respect parliament. And here we are 3 years after we asked for these documents and finally starting to get some of the truth behind what happened.
And so this is a damning indictment on this prime minister, his management of of the government of Canada, and his lack of respect for our democracy.
Speaker 5: Good morning, everyone. Canadians need to know that 2 scientists with deep relationship with many institutions inside the People's Republic of China infiltrated Canada's top microbiology lab in Winnipeg. While there, People's Liberation Army scientists from the Academy of Military Medical Scientists, which is charged with biology enabled weapons, were able to gain a secret security clearance, which gave them unfettered and unsupervised access to the laboratory and to the computer based science network. This is a travesty and a breach denying four orders of parliament, taking the speaker to court and calling it unnecessary election during COVID, which, of course resulted in us understanding now very clearly that there was Chinese interference in that election. Canadians need to know also that this was not a national security threat cover up.
It was a cover up to avoid political embarrassment. This is an embarrassment to our country, and Canadians also need to know who is going to be held responsible in this sunny ways government who covered this up, who was at the head from a political nature? Why did they cover up for so long? And when will someone such as a minister or a prime minister be held responsible on behalf of all Canadians? I thank you.
Speaker 3: Just one one more thing where we just wanna add to this is as we actually look at this and you think about, the documents that we all took a lot of time last night going through and the cover up that, we've been going under for the last 3 years because of Justin Trudeau and his corruption and his coverups. We got to remember that in, in, if you look at page 97, paragraph, number 5 in the thesis document, it says, and this is where this gets really critical here when it comes to our national security. The Academy of Military Medical Sciences of the People's Liberation Army of the People's Republic of China. And has offensive chemical and biological weapons capabilities. As for China's key national research and development priorities is to support National Defense Research Projects by transforming the results of basic civil research into military applications.
So although you have Justin Trudeau, not at all concerned about our national security, more concerned about his political embarrassments, us as conservatives under, Pierre Polya, want to make sure that we continue to go out there and support our national security and make sure that this never happens again. We don't know exactly what. Materials, technology, viruses, and other, biological things that they're in that lab were actually turned over to the PRC and to the People's Liberation Army. We know that they're interested in weaponization. And so we cannot have these biological weapons created in China and used against us here in Canada or our allies.
You wanna talk about an embarrassment. This is a national embarrassment. It's an international embarrassment, and our own national security is at risk.
Speaker 1: Let me just say that this is a national security failure on the highest level. The head of the unit at the Winnipeg Lab responsible for pathogens was with the foremost expert in the PLA with respect to biodefense and bioterrorism. And through it all, the prime minister was less than transparent with Canadians, and he covered it up. And the question is, who bears responsibility? And the answer to that question is very simple.
Justin Trudeau bears responsibility. The buck stops with Justin Trudeau. As prime minister, he has special responsibilities for national security, and he has a lot to answer for for this colossal failure to his watch.
reSee.it AI Summary
A detailed analysis reveals evidence of fraudulent data fabricated by @DFisman for @JustinTrudeau's lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and demonization of the unvaccinated. Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of Fisman's Fraud, discusses this in an interview: https://youtu.be/6Wmev10VSsA?si=2lz_w5GHn0K1m9ag
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
A more in-depth & comprehensive summary of the evidence exposing the fraudulent data which @DFisman fabricated for @JustinTrudeau so that he could invoke his unlawful lockdowns, segregation & demonization of the unvaccinated and his tyrannical vaccine travel mandates. Featuring Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of the bestselling book, Fisman's Fraud: https://amzn.to/47X11iu Full uncut interview with commercials etc: https://youtu.be/6Wmev10VSsA?si=2lz_w5GHn0K1m9ag
Video Transcript AI Summary
Gina's book, "Fisman's Fraud: The Rise of Canadian Hate Scientists," exposes the scientific fraud and manipulation that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The book focuses on a study conducted by Dr. Fisman and his colleagues, which was used to justify vaccine mandates and restrictions. Gina highlights the flaws and fabrications in the study, showing how it was used to scapegoat the unvaccinated and undermine individual rights. She argues that the fraud and manipulation have far-reaching implications and calls for accountability and protections to be put in place. Gina believes that change can be achieved through strategic action and leveraging the evidence presented in her book.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank you. It's great to be here.
Speaker 1: We're gonna be talking about, your book, which I enjoyed very much. All of our viewers and listeners know that whenever we have a guest on who's written a book, I take the time to read it, and I've done so with yours. She's, written a groundbreaking new book called Fisman's Fraud. So, Gina, I wonder if you could tell us a little bit about your background. Obviously, in my research on you, you've Completed a PhD at the University of Western Ontario.
But how did you happen on to, or or sort of get launched on this path that led you to write a book. It seems that, this is something you wouldn't have imagined, prior to COVID. So how did, how did this all come about? I'm very interested in sort of the origin story of your book.
Speaker 0: I can say that the origin The book started when I read the FISMA study, but it started long before that. I was paying attention to what was happening right From the get go. And, right from the beginning, the government's response didn't make any sense at all from a from a, risk analysis and a risk Mitigation. If you're trying to mitigate risk, they're they're heading in the opposite direction almost at every turn. So I was Very, aware of what the statistics were saying.
I was very aware of the manipulations that taking place. When Fizman's, fraudulent study came about, at first I just tried to ignore it. It was just ridiculous study. When when I when I heard it on the on the radio and I heard well, I seen the, the newspaper clippings, I thought How ridiculous. But there was so many of them, just so many, and it wasn't going away.
So that's what prompted me to, to read The study to see how they can possibly have reached the conclusion that they did. And right away when I read that study, it was obvious to me that it was a blatant case of scientific fraud. Like
Speaker 1: And and the fraud is essentially that, and I'm distilling this down quite a bit. And you'll correct me if I'm wrong. The fraud was essentially that unvaccinated people this was a a pandemic of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated pose a serious danger to everyone who was vaccinated. That was essentially the fraud.
Is that right?
Speaker 0: Right. So I was thinking about, how to describe this a little bit easier For people who haven't read the book. And I think it's important to understand that the timeline of when this book was written.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: Not the book, but When the actual study was written, by Bismond and his two colleagues.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: So they wrote this study. It was published in April of 2022.
Speaker 1: That's exactly when that statement I read off the top of the show. Sorry to interrupt just to put this in context. That statement I read from the prime minister was also released in April of 22. And that's not a coincidence, is it?
Speaker 0: The statement you're talking about, the one where he says we're taking Space?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 0: I I think though it was beforehand, but it didn't get a lot of notice, originally because it was in French. Right. But yeah, he said a lot of things. But with regards to This study, it was written in April of 2022. So we're looking at after the omicron surge.
So the omicron surge happened, you know, December, January, January, over the Christmas holidays and it was a really bad it was really bad news for the for the vaccines. You had record breaking surges in the number of daily cases. It was quite clear that the vaccines failed to transmission and our politicians and those who were pushing for vaccine mandates and restrictions, we're getting pretty Desperate. So a lot of desperate things happened during this timeline. And instead of admitting, you know, the shortcomings of the vaccine and And their mistakes, the government basically doubled down.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: So they doubled down. We had, you You know, Prime Minister Trudeau was was blaming the unvaccinated for the surges. He's blaming He unvaccinated for filling up hospitals. He's blaming the unvaccinated for, The restrictions that he was putting in place. Right.
So that that's kind of, the And then you had, in April of 2022, Fisman came out with his study and basically, This study was used to prop up the vaccine mandates and the restrictions and to scapegoat the unvaccinated For, for the vaccine's failure to curtail community transmission, basically. Mhmm. The fraud comes in in that They fabricated the the data and the results. And then they tried to pass off their fabricated results as a true of what happened as fact. And that is what constitutes the fraud.
So, you cannot Unintentionally make something up, pass it off as true, and not know you're doing it. Right. So That would that
Speaker 1: would violate what everything that you know, science is is about. And just just backing up a step, your background is essentially in in identifying, statistical trends and explaining what they mean, or learning what they mean. Or and correct me if that's wrong, but that's my understanding. What was What was Fisman's background essentially?
Speaker 0: Well, Fisman is, he's a physician in internal medicine, And he's also, he's an epidemiologist and he teaches, mathematical modeling. So he teaches the subject. So he's well aware Of what, well, he should be well aware of how to build a proper model.
Speaker 1: He should You would hope.
Speaker 0: You would hope. And this model, when you, when you take a look at it, it doesn't just, it's not just scientific fraud. When you actually look at the modeling itself, it is, it is so bad on every level. Like you can Itself. It is, it is so bad on every level.
Like you can critique it, just the scientific merit of this paper, if there just isn't any. And when I wrote to, you know, CMAJ and, the University of Toronto and CIHR, I included a full of the study and how it fails just on its scientific merit, let alone the scientific fraud. Mhmm. But I I should mention one more thing that was very, very important. Not only did he fabricate the results and try to pass them off as true, But there was readily available data, government data, and the real world data showed the opposite of what he was saying.
Alright. So basically he when you look at the omicron surge and you look at the government of Ontario data, It actually showed, that the proportion of vaccinated people with getting COVID was higher than the Vaccinated. That's what the raw data showed right from the government of Ontario website. And he basically ignored real world data and flipped the trends And then pass that off as a true reflection of events. So you're basically overwriting the omicron surge with a fake simulation that As the opposite.
And then it went out to the public. And another interesting thing that happened was it, it was Publicized everywhere. Everywhere. You're looking at over, you know, 90, media outlets Talking about this study and warning people to stay away from unvaccinated individuals.
Speaker 1: Right. It's a it was a public ostracization, really. This modeling is very interesting, Gina. I I came to grips with this when I was conducting a case in Alberta called Ingram where we were challenging the the, you know, the scientific basis for lockdowns. And, we one of our experts was a brilliant scientist.
You probably So his name is Doctor Jay Bhattacharya, and, he's, he was explaining to me how models are used by scientists, in just the way that you describe. Those are people who who are scientists understand modeling very well and can detect a fraud pretty quickly. But to those of us laypeople, especially, let's say, lawyers and judges, for example, These models can be very persuasive because we don't understand how they work. But, doctor Jay actually showed me how in the Ingram Ace. The the the the government of Alberta was actually using climate modeling, was was actually sort of plagiarizing climate models and using them, inputting, you know, the data that they wanted in the models and then using that to justify, I oh, I don't know.
Exploding, you know, hospital beds and, you know, the you know, predicting the the entire collapse of the health care system, which I'm sure sounds very familiar to those of you who live in Ontario and every province in Canada. But this modeling seems to be, unfortunately, a very effective method for scientists to execute the kind of fraud that you talk about in your book. Is that a fair statement?
Speaker 0: Okay. Well, you had to break down a little bit because Sure. I don't want to give modeling a bad name Because basically all of all of science, depends, to some extent on modeling. Okay? So you don't you don't Any statistical inference without model assumptions and modeling.
And it's very, very important and it and it plays An important role, in in making proper inferences.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: The thing is that you have to look at How it's being used and if it's being used properly. And there, this is one of those topics where there's a lot of nuances. One of them is you can use, for example, modeling, to predict, what's going to happen, which is what you would be doing in this case with with with, You know, infection rates and that type of thing. So a good model will make good predictions. So you can test whether your model was good or not.
And you can also your model has to be tethered to reality. Like the assumptions have to be tested that go into your modeling. Bismond didn't do any of that. And a lot of these models, they are completely untethered to reality. They just make up fiction.
So when you look At, at Doctor. Fisman's, modeling, He wasn't even predicting the future. He was, he was actually modeling the past and getting it all wrong. Like, isn't this very different than some of the other models? It's like if you look originally at when, the pandemic hit and they were going with Neil Ferguson's model in the UK, that basically said, oh my God, We all have to lock down.
So that right there was, you know, basically the start of this modeling that resulted in lockdowns and that Lockdowns and that type of thing. Anybody who, you know, is good at mathematical modeling would look at his Model right from the get go and say, no, it's it's way off. It's it's it's off by, you know, an order or 2 of magnitude. And I did that Calculation. I looked at the data that was known at the time back in March, looked at the curves, the worldwide data, kind of estimated when the curve would be Flattened or we'd reach peak when it would start going down.
And I got also an estimate of the infection fatality rate. You could do this, you know, a ballpark figure based on what we had. And it was way lower than Ferguson's.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: As time went on, You know, it was obvious his model was poor and you could say it was bad, but at least he was predicting the future and you can test and say, yeah, it failed. With Fisman, he was trying to, like, overwrite the past. Right. Yes. And and when you and when you brought it to their attention, like, hey, This surge happened already, and it was opposite.
They didn't correct. They didn't do anything. They just kept with it.
Speaker 1: Well, this is what's important also when you talk about inferences. In your book, you you not only expose the fraud, You also draw some inferences about why it occurred and what it means for us. You want to talk about that a little bit? Yes.
Speaker 0: This is another important topic is that people might wonder why I'm talking about, this study that happened back in 2022, it's over. Move forward. Go forward. The problem is that this has extremely important implications for the future. When you look at why the study was done, the study was done To justify, basically, mandates and and vaccine mandates and and passports.
But By doing that, the the the authors were the line of reasoning is that because vaccination Impacts others. It should not be considered or you may not consider it an individual right. So basically They're looking at I'd say they were attempting to reinterpret section 7 of the charters the way I I read it in that, it should not be considered an individual right. If it's not considered an individual right, then there was no violation by mandating Vaccines. If they if you take that interpretation and you go forward, this is very bad for future mandates.
So if there was no section 7 violation, then the government would never have to explain itself, under section 1, Oakes test, Right. The onus of proof flips to us instead of the government where it belongs.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: I mean, I can, I can go off in a lot of different ways here in that a lot of what has been done is a flipping of the onus of proof, where the proof is supposed to be versus where there it is? And I I find this has happened across the board. When you, when you look at even looking at the safety and the effectiveness of the Effectiveness of the of the vaccine. Safety in particular, they're supposed to establish safety. We're not supposed to wait, look at the evidence, They say, hey, look, it's unsafe.
They're supposed to test that it is safe. Right. They've kind of flipped that and said, oh, you Can't prove that it's not safe. Right? Like, well, you collect the data, you own the data, you control the data, but we have have to prove, that it's unsafe.
So there's there's throughout the whole pandemic, there was a flipping of the the onus of proof. And I I believe this is what is going on with the motivation behind this study. And he and the thing is Bismond has done a lot of interviews and he's come right out and basically said that it undermines the notion That vaccine choice is an individual right. It undermines that. That was why they started off.
The problem is that As he was writing this, the omicron surge happened.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: And then it's like, uh-oh, it's not looking good. So then he had to Do double duty and blame the unvaccinated for this surge, which is the amount of gaslighting, the scientific gaslighting That's gone into this is is shocking.
Speaker 1: Well, this this is one of the concerns actually when, you know, speaking of again of of Jay Bhattacharya, he that one of the longest lasting, most detrimental impacts of, of of the pandemic, and it's because of what you're talking about, is the loss of confidence, public confidence in health care and in science. He described science as this conversation across time as sort of a a a species of freedom of speech. And the conversation is across time is, you know, the best example would be the peer review method where somebody has an idea and hypothesis. As they they they put that forth with certain evidence, and then somebody else comes along and says, well, no. You have you that that's not right.
You haven't looked at this. You haven't Looked at that and the sort of strongest deal is forged in hot as fire. We get the best ideas. And this is why science as an inquiry, as all intellectual inquiries, whether it's in art or music, literature, law, whatever, is a search for truth. That's what it ought to be.
Yeah. But what you're talking about is a manipulation of science, for some other motive other than to reveal truth. And that that kinda gets at the heart of the matter, doesn't it?
Speaker 0: Well, here's nothing. I go I go further. It's I'm not sure you can even call it science because they didn't follow the fundamental principles of Science at home. You can actually, shatter their narrative. Just going back to fundamentals, going back to the very basics.
They fail everything. Thanks. And the reason why they were able to do that, is because of the censorship, because they they did not allow the debate. If they had allowed the debate, if we had Open and honest communication. I can't see this ever happening because it was so obviously wrong.
Now I'm not just I'm not just talking about Bismond study. I'm talking about a lot of what's been on during the pandemic. The only way that this could Gone forth is because of the censorship. It's because they did not allow scientists to weigh in. So to call it science when Basically can be shown to, fail the most fundamental principles of science.
Yeah. That's called, like, pseudoscience maybe.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: Okay. That's not science. And so what what they did was they they really they really destroyed the Reputation of Real Science.
Speaker 1: Mhmm. And this censorship is not over. In fact, as you know, there's a situation in New Zealand right Now where there's actually a man who's in jail, he's a whistleblower. He's revealed that, about 11,000 High ranking public officials, politicians, quote, New Zealand elite, were actually, lied about the fact that they were vaccinated. They were actually exempted outside of public knowledge.
And you mentioned off camera before we came on that, in fact, your own book, has suffered some degree of censorship. So that censorship is something that's not back in April of 2022. It's happening right here, right now, isn't it?
Speaker 0: Well, yeah, it just keeps going along and getting worse and worse. And it pretty much asked to in order for this narrative to continue, in order for this, what's going on to Continue. I mean, they have issues because things have worked out so badly in terms of, Like it's so bad, it's hard to hide. And so you need an extreme amount of censorship to keep things going. And I think what we have to realize is that We already have a lot of evidence that can be used.
I believe we really have enough
Speaker 1: to That's a great point,
Speaker 0: yeah. We do. We need to use What we have and and part of what I do in this book is showing that we can use what we have at the very basic level. It can be Simple and, simple, systematic, strategic. And you can do a lot of damage on that.
And people understand that. People understand, when you show McGrath and you show this is what the real data said, This is what he said. It's very easy to see that, for example, Fisman flipped reality. Like this is, and it's powerful. And it's, and, And it's a very, I took a very systematic approach because at first when I seen this study, I thought, oh my goodness, it's fraudulent and it's being used to scapegoat Unvaccinated people.
So my original intent was to, basically get the paper retracted and set Set the record straight. That's it.
Speaker 1: Mhmm.
Speaker 0: Stop the scapegoating. Set the record straight. Let's correct for it.
Speaker 1: I think this is one of the things that you've done extremely well in your book actually is I would call it relatable or digestible science for people who are not scientists. And, you know, other people agree, there's a couple of, very, you know, very compelling reviews. One of them says is that this is from, Ted Koontz, who's the president of Vaccine Choice Academy, says that your book is both a disturbing and exhilarating read, It exposes what is effectively a crime scene with various agents complicit in producing fraudulent science that was used by media and the prime minister to fuel hatred and societal division. And he says you reveal in precise detail how every system of oversight and accountability from the University of Toronto The Ontario Provincial Police failed in their duty to act with integrity. He says the exhilarating aspect is that the book shines a bright light on those responsible.
You name names and you call them out for what they are morally bankrupt. He says your book gives hope that by Poison the Fraud, Justice May Prevail and Civility Restored to This Nation. And, you know, he's right. And, and your book is part of an encouraging, movement in the in the Canadian polity that I think is showing up in in certain statistics. For example, about 97% of the Canadian population is resisting boosters.
So so, you know, You're you're actually doing a lot of a lot of good, and performing, I I think, the the at least providing a counternarrative to people like miss like doctor Fisman.
Speaker 0: Right. Thank you. Yes. It provides Counter narrative, but I think, one of the things that this does is by going through the different agencies that were involved Mhmm. And for them down and and and backing the fraud, knowing it was fraudulent.
That's extremely incriminating. And I didn't just go back to them once or twice. I went several times, you know, each time showing arguments that no, you know, like, take a look at this. I was very Clear. I want to make sure there was, you know, no, misinterpretations about what I was saying, That I wanted to make it as clear as possible, show that it was fraud, and they stuck to it.
And then when they it seemed when they were backed into a corner, they would close And each time they did that, I'd go to the next person on the rung. Right? So first I went to the Canadian Medical Association Journal. They didn't really engage in dialogue. I went to University of Toronto.
They have a process in place where they have to respond to me, but when I back them into a corner, they close the file. And then I went to the Funding agency, which was CIHR, that's that's federal money. Okay? And Yeah. The federal government funded this.
It was used in parliament, And they're not going to correct the record. This is highly incriminating. Mhmm. And I I believe my book shows a very strong case as to why protections need to be put in place. And this is where I'm going next.
Speaker 1: We Right.
Speaker 0: To me, this book Should be enough to, basically amend the human rights codes and acts in the, in the different It really is when you're, when you have researchers and the establishment, you know, resorting to fraud In order to to bring about vaccine mandates, we need protections. Mhmm. Mhmm.
Speaker 1: So It sounds as though you sort of had a bit of a Martin Luther journey. You're trying to reform things from within, and your book was sort of the posting of your ninety my thesis on the cathedral door. And and hopefully, it'll have that type of reformatory Impact upon upon our situation. I'd like to get your take on a couple of things, a couple of recent stories that are related to your book and and the topic. It was a recent story that came out, from Health Canada.
Court documents reveal Canadians were unwittingly subjected to phase 3 medical trials through through the pandemic. Essentially, Health Canada Risk the lives of millions of Canadians by altering their approval process so they could expedite the Pfizer vaccine. Essentially that, we were unwittingly the trial group for this vaccine. Obviously, your book not only supports that idea, but also supports that, certain scientists, including doctor Fisman, tried to cover that up. What does this mean for us?
So what, what do, what can we do about this at this point?
Speaker 0: I go into a little bit of the book, all the different, You know, failures in the system. Yeah. And and one of them is when you look at, the clinical trials. So the the problem we have is that it was pretty well known this was experimental. They keep saying it's not Experimental, but it was.
All you have to do is actually read the clinical trial reports themselves, which, you know, the FDA was using, Health Canada was using, they had the book, and it's also what, you know, we did in our family right away. I believe it My daughter, who was the first one to read them, she came up to me and said, Hey, mom, what's going on here? Did you read this? I read it and I'm like, holy, you know, like It was, it was bad. It was they did not prove the things that the, that the government was, It's claiming.
So when you, especially when you look at, effectiveness, all right, the clinical trials never established Reduction in mortality. They never established a reduction in hospitalization. It didn't do those things. So for the government to say take this and You know, you'll reduce your chance of death or hospitalization. That did not happen in the clinical trials.
So, you know, but but they also play a lot with definitions. They also play a lot with words, and they play a lot with the data. So I don't know. There's there's so many branches we can go into where There's just manipulating, at all levels. But the but the thing is also that if you if you go back to some of the government documents, including, you know, What the what the chief you know, government scientist says, there's admissions in there that they didn't know if it curtailed transmission.
They didn't Know what it does to certain subpopulations like, you know, pregnant women. It's actually all out there. It's just not being reported on. Like the media Has chosen not to report things that are well, you know, should have been well known. So for people to be discovering it now, that's a failure of the, About the media to a large a large part.
Speaker 1: The but the question that I think people watching this and and people are wondering is, why? Why why the cover up? And why is every government in Canada, still pushing the vaccines, especially the federal government. Even in Alberta, where our premier has been more outspoken than really any other, premier in Canada about the unvaccinated and about vaccines. These vaccines are still available to small children.
So why given all that we know are do we still have vaccine, manufacturing factories being constructed in Canada. Taxpayer dollars in the billions are still being spent on more and more doses of these vaccines. Why is that all occurring despite what you reveal in your book?
Speaker 0: Well, I guess it's occurring because no one's stopping it. I mean, this has been, This has been a lot of people have benefited, well not a lot, I guess a small elite group of people have benefited, from what went on in during the pandemic. You know, there are people who got very, very rich from what happened. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: Would Fiskeman be would Fiskeman be one of those in your view?
Speaker 0: Well, I mean, you would have to do an investigation into His, you know, financial statements, which I didn't do. It would be interesting if, you know, RCMP did look at that. But when you look at a lot of these people, Like Sisman does have a lot of ties to the pharmaceutical industry. He has a lot and and and it's, you know, there there's the Financial aspect, but there's also the ideological aspect. There's a lot of Politics at play here, and a lot of power.
So they show no sign of slowing down, Even though we we know, we know what's going on. It's it's it's so bad you can't hide it, and yet they keep going forward. I think one of the things they're gonna have a problem with Because originally they're trying to say that they didn't know, we didn't know better. And it's also why I go in my book through the timeline, like in one of the chapters I look at, you know, I carve a path through the pandemic of what was known and when Versus what they were telling us. And you can see that you're being lied to.
Mhmm. So, but You know, oh, it was, it was a novel situation. We didn't know what to do. As time goes on and they do not correct, you can't keep clinging to Though we didn't know because there's been no force correction. But they keep going forward and we they keep bringing in, You know, more rules about disinformation, allowing them to censor more, allowing them to, you know, a lot of people get cancelled.
That's that's where we're headed. So unless they are held to account, we'll just keep going in that direction. We We need to start holding people to account, and we Mhmm. We need to start putting protections in place.
Speaker 1: Right. And That's an interesting point. I I'm interested to get your take on on, on this. The National Citizens Inquiry, just released, a comprehensive report about 54 100 pages. And just before that last month, That is in November.
In Alberta, there was a a manning, panel, an inquiry into the government's handling of COVID 19. Each of those documents recommends full blown public inquiry into COVID 19, and specifically government's handling of it and changes in the law, some of which you recommend in your book. So do you agree, for example, with the NCI report and also with the Manning inquiry, panel report that what we need in Canada and really in every province is a is a full blown public inquiry, a series of them that have the teeth and the force of law that can subpoena certain people, including people like doctor Fisman, put them under oath, cross examine them, and if necessary, Actually, indict them and hold them to to to the full standard of of the criminal law. Do you agree that that's something that is needed in our country?
Speaker 0: Yeah. We would need that. But what we've seen so far because we're far from that. I mean, especially you know probably better than anybody, the courts throughout all of this Have not have have not, done their duty. Oh, sure.
They don't wanna hear they don't wanna hear the evidence. They've made it very clear that they'll do Anything not to hear it Yeah. Actually. Right? Yeah.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court of Canada has actually refused to hear exercise its discretion to It refused to hear any case dealing with COVID thus
Speaker 0: far. Yeah. And it doesn't surprise me because right off the top, you had, you know, the Supreme Court basically Going into in a committee with the Liberals
Speaker 1: Mhmm.
Speaker 0: About how to handle things. Like, they were We were totally on board with a lot of the measures. They were totally on board with, bringing in their own vaccine mandates before the federal government even did it. So if you have the Supreme Court doing that, you know, We're in trouble. That's an issue.
So although I think, yes, we need an inquiry, we need those things, But we have to look at whether we're going to get them. And right now what I see is the NCI, for example, There's a lot of good information there. We can already use it. If the courts think, this is what I I look at what the courts are doing and I think to myself, wow, They're really undermining their authority and they're undermining their credibility. And people are starting to look at them and say, you know, If we cannot rely on the courts for justice, then we have to seek alternative ways to get justice.
And I think that might be where things are going. We're not going to wait and it's like, oh, you said too bad, so I guess it's too bad.' It's like, no, That is not acceptable, and there's, you know, there's gonna always be people, in the way, and you just have to figure out how to get around them.
Speaker 1: Right. Right? You talk about the courts, the, former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. In fact, the longest serving one, Beverly McLaughlin, who now sits on a human rights tribunal in China, drink that in for a moment. She said this in the wake of the Freedom Convoy.
She said, Freedom Without Limits slides imperceptibly into freedom to say and do what you want about people who don't like you or talk like you. Sadly, the Ottawa truckers convoy has revealed this ugly side of freedom. And she went on to say that effectively, things like masking, crossing a border without a vaccine certificate, How many people can attend a school, a party, who gets to go to school are all things that a government is entitled to use has limits upon, Charter Protected Freedoms. And I think you and I agree that's essentially a Pandora's box. That's that's a for me to empower that that no government and no court should be able to exercise.
And and if they can, then We're deluded if we think we're living in a free and democratic society. Right?
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, throughout the pandemic, they've They've twisted everything. Everything they said about, going after people, anybody you don't like and don't wanna hear, well, that is what It has been happening to anybody who did not agree with what the government was doing. Yeah. You say that it's you know, and when you look at the trucker convoy, They were basically protesting mandates.
They were protesting, unconstitutional measures. So the root of that were the measures. They were unconstitutional. You know, nobody should be able to dictate what you put In your body, period. That is supposed to be God protected.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: And the gover and and and the courts don't even wanna hear about it?
Speaker 1: Mhmm. Meanwhile, you know, we have top legal intellectuals like Timothy Caulfield, who recently received the order of Canada. He he he said he tweeted this out during the convoy. He said, the freedom convoy is about the vaccines. He says, don't get distracted by the right spin.
He says, I understand the supply chain issues. Challenging. But he says, but countries require a bunch of things to across borders, passports. Mandates work, are supported by Canadians, and are legally justifiable. So when you have, you know, some of your top legal intellectuals in the country saying things like that, while the convoy is going on, you know, you've got a serious devaluation of of freedom in our in our country.
And as you say, this is only just just at the beginning. And then we have some of the interesting financial disclosure. For example, it came out recently that Canada paid the highest prices, which shouldn't surprise anybody. Kind of made the highest prices in the world for COVID 19 vaccines at $38 per shot. Now I did some Quick I'm not a the mathematician in your class, but I did some I did some quick math.
It's and based on the numbers that have been revealed, that's That's about $2,500,000,000 just on the first two shots. So we're talking about really big money here. Aren't we?
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. We spent a lot of money and a lot of money on, you know, expired vaccines.
Speaker 1: Which are just wasted, right?
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, yeah. They spent a lot getting the vaccines and then they had to spend, You know, they, they tossed a lot of the vaccines because the quantities that we, we, we procured were 3rd. From from what you were saying, there's so many things in there. You talked about Timothy Caulfield.
And I always find it's it's interesting That they say, oh, it's it's legally justifiable. It's like, is it? Because we're not allowed to talk about it. Supreme Court doesn't wanna hear about it. They've never had to justify what they did.
And when I go through one of the first things I did, early on, this was before the mandates and there was talk, oh, there you know, like, you know, how the the the media often puts out little things that so you know what's coming. Right. So there's talk about mandates well before the mandates. Like that would never happen, but they're kind of prepping us for the fact that it was going to happen. And at that time I thought, well, can they do it?
So I looked, you know, I looked into law. I'm not a lawyer, there but I I can read. And so I looked up, you know, Oakes' test and I looked up the criteria and and they're saying that the scientific evidence I'm like, Well, what statisticians do is they look at scientific evidence. We know basically, one of the roles of a a statistician is understanding how data can be used, what you can and cannot say, what inferences can be made, what can't. So So I look at what the government was saying, and I'm like, can they make those claims?
And I was like, no. They can't make these claims. What would they have to collect. What data would they need to make those claims, and how would they have to collect it to make those claims? So I look at that, and then I also look at what the data Does say.
So even though a lot of it a lot of the data has shortcomings, there are things that you can't say from the data. So one of the things we do as statistician is we assess the evidence. Okay. And when I looked That Oakes test, for example, in law, I said, okay, they say it's based on scientific evidence. So I went through the criteria and I'm like, it fails them all.
It fails everything. So they keep saying it passes it and like, no, it doesn't. And if we could go to court, we would show it. So you don't want us to go to court. That's how I see it.
They know it hasn't passed. So now I've
Speaker 1: done You're right. You're right. But but the problem is this, Gina. When you go through the OAKS test. You're looking you're applying that test in the way that I think it was originally intended, and that is to, as far as possible, be objective and looking at what is correct.
But the way that it changed during COVID is that correctness, which is an objective standard, was was deemphasized. And what was overemphasized, hyperemphasized was reasonableness, which as you know is a subjective that is what happened with the Oakes test, and that's what's happened in our courts. And I don't know if that same standard has, sort of been been, diluted, d I l u t e d, diluted in science in the same way that it has been in law. But I can tell you in law, it has with disastrous effects.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, in in science, You know, when you're doing any kind of hypothesis testing, you you have your your default hypothesis. This this doesn't change. I mean, they have been changing it. They've been flipping it, But it's a joke that you can go through, it's like, well, then it's unscientific.
Everything that you're doing now is unscientific if you do that. Right? So that's happened during Trials that happened with, with a lot of things. And reasonableness, yeah, I noticed that they're kind of slipping around that and and they've been a lot playing A lot from what I can see with flipping the onus of proof when it comes to legal standards as well. Like there's been a lot of playing around.
Yeah. So our job really is to show that it is not reasonable, make it very obvious it is not reasonable, And then try to put the orders of proof back where it belongs. That's that's challenging. That's challenging for you. Mhmm.
Mhmm.
Speaker 1: Well, and and, you know like? Yeah. Well, I I guess what I tell people is we lose we lose until we win, but we don't stop fighting. And, in the same way, I mean, people like you who are scientists and researchers, you keep telling the truth, right, until you drown out the lies. But you know, you talk about this in your book.
These these lies and their impacts are not in the past. And there was a recent study that was just revealed on November 27th this year showing that, deaths from COVID, increased in 2022 after the COVID vaccine was introduced, while deaths due to unspecified causes also skyrocketed. How strange is that? And, Maxime Bernier, who's the leader for the party that, that you ran for in the last election, He says these numbers should be front page news. He says we were bombarded daily with data about deaths during 3 years.
The lying media are completely ignoring it. You agree with his assessment on that point?
Speaker 0: Well, yeah. They, they have to, ignore it because it looks so bad. By their own measures, by their own measures, these vaccines have failed. That's what it shows. Right.
COVID deaths did not decrease. They increased. What happened during Omicron was really interesting. I go through the book, the timeline. So the fact that the vaccines didn't stop transmission was well known before Omicron.
It's just that Omicron made it so Yes. They couldn't even no manipulations could make it look good. So what happened is they stopped reporting it. So I think this is what Maxime's Going on, right? It's like, well, we're just not going to look anymore because it makes everything look bad.
So that's, you know, before they could manipulate things a certain way And I could go through the different manipulations that are possible to show, how bad it was. But it did get to a point where There's just nothing you can do except ignore it. You know, ignore it and overwrite it like Fisman did. Let's, like, pretend that didn't happen. This is the reality we want.
So we basically We did this. Mhmm. Mhmm. But
Speaker 1: That's what your book is your your book is Changing Hearts and Minds. There's another review from, Vincent Guercis, who's a veteran police constable with the OPPs, forensic collision reconstructor, just saw a scientist like you. He says your book is a must read. It slices through the layers of lost integrity, accountability, and responsibility, revealed the greatest deception of our time. That's quite a statement.
He says easy to read but hard to swallow. That's a nice way to put The facts speak volumes in implicating those in power who intentionally failed to keep the ship off the rocks. Although the content is as if to Ontario, the implications were deadly far reaching, and the situation warrants further investigation. I couldn't Agree more. He says those responsible are currently still at the helm, and the ship is in dangerous waters.
Yeah. We have the wrong and we have the wrong captains. That's a huge problem. Do you foresee that, any of this is gonna change without, some kind of a regime change. We see this starting to happen in New Zealand where there's there's a sort of urgent Call for Accountability.
You know, could Jacinda Ardern be sought for potential misconduct and medical mandate crisis as, Jim Ferguson in the UK is is is saying. Is it realistic to expect that anything is gonna change in Canada, while, while the Liberals are still in power, you know, why why, for example, mister Ford, who guided Ontario or misguided Ontario through the pandemic is still in power. Do you think there's any chance that this is gonna change, in the short term?
Speaker 0: Well, I probably have a slightly different take on this than other people. So I don't think everything's gonna be fixed just because like if in the case where we had a Change. A regime change. That would be good. That'd be a great start.
And and I know a lot of people are are, you know, Pierre's doing really good in the polls And that would certainly be a step in the right direction because, you know, we need to get Trudeau out. But do I think that would be sufficient? No, I don't. I think that we need more than just the politicians aren't going to save this. Okay.
A lot of them got us in This mess, and there's a lot of corrections to take place. So I just don't see them all happening just because you Change, your political leader. Although, like I said, it's great. That would be a great place to to to start. The issue also is that we're not due for an election for a couple more years and people speculate saying it will happen sooner, but, you know, Trudeau's not doing well in the polls.
And as long as, NDP prop them up. It's safer for them to stay where they are.
Speaker 1: Mhmm. He's also got a new he's got a new pitchman now. Mr. Valiquette, who was very outspoken about the unvaccinated, as you know.
Speaker 0: Yes. Well, This is where I probably differ from from people. I'm looking at this and I'm like, the assumption is that we have to Wait for politicians to leave, and we have to wait for a regime change. And I'm kind of Seth, thinking. I think that we can start the people have power in numbers, and we can start pushing for accountability now.
We just Have to, be strategic on how we go about that. That's
Speaker 1: refreshing. That's refreshing.
Speaker 0: We're not Yeah. Part of the reason I wrote this book is because it's like, you know what? Bismenck was obvious and it's easy to show and it implicates major players. Okay. And implicates them in a very bad way in terms of you used fraud to do This.
Speaker 1: Mhmm.
Speaker 0: We need to be protected from you. So I think that it does have the if if If we leverage it, it has the ability for change. We can start there because FISMAN's modeling and what they have done, that That's to the core of the pandemic response. It cuts to the core of the mandates. And if you have that based on fraud, this is This could do a lot of damage to their plans and their narrative.
I don't think we should wait for, You know, for Pierre to come in. I think that we can, you know, force change based on what we have. We just have to be strategic. Yeah. That's where I'm coming from.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And, it's obvious that you're very passionate about it just to listen to you speak and also, in the book. And the other thing is that there's no guarantee with the regime change that anything will change at least on the COVID file, and that's part of the point of your book. Speaking of your book, turning to our reading list, your book obviously is featured. It's called FISMAN's Fraud, the Rise of Canadian Hate Scientists.
Just, and, as you've been hearing, it describes when pseudo science, politics, and fraud converge. It asks The question, what lengths will ideologically or financially driven researchers and politicians go to impose their will upon others? And it answers that question among others. She is in the book, she examines The man, the politics, and the intent behind the the foe study. How researchers concocted results to overwrite reality and scapegoat The Unvaccinated.
She talks about the establishment's willingness to go along with the fraud, how political ideology fed into the analysis how the research is being used now to swindle Canadians out of their charter rights and Freedoms, all of that and more in this incredible book. And there's a companion actually. As you've heard, Gina is a scientist. All of this is copiously and carefully documented, and there's actually a supplementary reference that you can purchase, which goes into and provides in detail all of our references, so that you can check these for yourself, cross reference them. And so those of you who really wanna take a deep dive into this book, there's no there's you could go really, really deep.
Amazon.com
amazon.com
reSee.it AI Summary
Trudeau accused of using fraudulent data for lockdowns and mandates. Interview with Dr. Regina Watteel, author of Fisman's Fraud, reveals shocking details. #Trudeau #lockdowns #fraud
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*BREAKING* "Trudeau caught using fraudulent data to impose lockdowns and tyrannical mandates on Canadians" Bombshell interview with our friend, Dr. @ReginaWatteel, author of the bestselling book Fisman's Fraud: https://amzn.to/47X11iu @jordanbpeterson @TuckerCarlson @WoodReporting @KarlDHarrison @ConradMBlack @brianlilley @rupasubramanya @NChartierET @nationalpost @globalnews @CBC @CTVNews @CP24 @TheTorontoSun
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the video, Dr. Regina Wateel discusses her book "Fisman's Fraud" and the academic misinformation surrounding COVID-19 policies in Canada. She highlights how the government and media used a fraudulent study to justify strict restrictions and vaccine mandates. Dr. Wateel discovered that the study was based on a mathematical model rather than actual population data. She faced resistance from the journal, the University of Toronto, and the Canadian government when she tried to expose the fraud. Dr. Wateel also reveals conflicts of interest, such as the lead author's ties to Moderna. The consequences of these policies were devastating for many Canadians, including restrictions on unvaccinated individuals and the loss of jobs and opportunities. Dr. Wateel emphasizes the need for individuals and grassroots movements to take action against such manipulation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And tortured the unvaccinated based on hate science, which is not science at all. That is what one author says in her new book, Fisman's Fraud. Doctor Regina Wateel joins us today. She's a Canadian statistician who took the time to read the studies that The media and the Canadian government was using to implement pandemic policy, and she found she could not, in fact, follow the science no no matter how hard she tried. Thank you so much for joining me today.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Glad to be here.
Speaker 0: Yes. I finished your book over the weekend, and I want to lay this out briefly so that our audience explains how you got there and just how serious this is in terms of academic misinformation. So in 2022, Canada insisted on keeping strict restrictions and vaccine requirements on its population, even though the science was beginning to show that the vaccine did not impact the transmission of COVID. And then right on cue, this study pops up saying that the unvaccinated are a threat to the vaccinated and responsible for the pandemic raging on. The media picks it up.
Politicians use it to implement policy. It's a big hit. But you, in fact, read it and realized that it's not based on population data, which was Available, but instead a mathematical model, and you hit the roof. You became what I call a dog with a bone. I love it.
You went to the journal, the university, and even the police to point out this fraud. So take me through it, how you got here, and why it set your hair on so much.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, the problem well, the big part of the The reason why I went after this is because my family was really impacted by the the mandates and the restrictions. So In the fall of 2021, what we had here in Canada, we had the vaccine passports. So The, unvaccinated were banned from most public venues, you know, restaurants, gyms, movie theaters. The universities were most of them were, in order for for for university students to go on campus, They had to be vaccinated, and then the the federal government had its vaccine mandates, on federal workers.
So in order to work, they had to be vaccinated, And they had also imposed travel restrictions, so we couldn't even travel by plane or train within our own country. It was a very isolating and very hard time for millions of Canadians. And then what happened in December in Christmas of 2021 is we had The omicron surge. And so the, the COVID 19 cases soared to record heights Despite the vaccines, 80% of the population was vaccinated. Still, we had these record surges, not only in in in cases, but in hospitalizations.
And instead of admitting that these vaccines, did not curb transmission, and instead of admitting failure, the the government basically doubled down and started imposing even more restrictions. And so that was December 21 and in January 20 2. And at the time, they were even imposed additional restrictions on unvaccinated truckers. So the world Calls that that sparked the the trucker convoy, the freedom convoy. And so The Freedom Convoy came in, and it put a lot of pressure on the provinces to relent on their passports and on the federal government to end their Mandates and, travel restrictions.
So out of desperation, the federal government, Those government, impose the Emergencies Act where they basically trampled on the protesters and froze bank accounts and that type of thing. In order to, you know, stop the momentum, in order to salvage their restrictions. But they needed to do more. They needed the science. And so this is where where FISMAN comes in because when you look at the actual, you know, government of Ontario data, Ontario is Largest province here in Canada.
When you look at our data, the government's own data, it showed that the The cases, the COVID cases were dominated by the vaccinated, and that the vaccinated actually had higher incident rates than the unvaccinated. So, yeah, Trudeau was in desperate need of of science and justification for his mandate, so in comes, Fisman and his colleagues. And what Fisman does Is is he can he he and his colleagues concoct a model to simulate fake data That shows the opposite of what real data shows. Fake data that shows that it's the unvaccinated that have higher, COVID 19 rates. And then he they tried to pass off their their fake results as fact.
And they use this, You know, fake results to to scapegoat the unvaccinated, to, provide justification for The federal government's mandates and restrictions, and then media ran with it. Media ran with it, warning everybody of the risk of merely hanging out with unvaccinated Canadians.
Speaker 0: Which is so upsetting because if you look at the study, they don't even use COVID 19 data at all. They say we simulated a respiratory infectious disease. And so the media should have known this is a simulation. They didn't seem to care. They just started running headlines that you you put a compendium in your book of the list of headlines about how, you're putting people at risk by going to the gym or getting on a train or an airplane or anything like that.
So, you know, it's it's a complete lack of duty by the media, but we sort of expect that. But the politicians who used it to implement Policy is, I wanna say, more upsetting. You seem to step by all of it, so you can tell me what you find the most upsetting.
Speaker 1: Well, right away, when I looked at the study, I I was well aware of what the data actually showed, so I knew right away that that It was it was bogus, but it just wasn't going away. Everybody was running with it, and it was so clearly fraudulent. What I found most, the worst was when the, the academic institutions, the research institutions would not retract the study or set the record straight. They allowed it to continue, and and it and that's really when I when I realized How corrupted the system is. It's not just the government here.
You know, the government is is Like, Trudeau's government is is there's a scandal every hour. It's terrible. And, unfortunately, the courts are are are more than happy to look the other way. But what my by going through all the you know, trying to get the paper retracted and going through the different organizations, I realized How how deeply involved the research institutions themselves were, and this was overt fraud. It was used To scapegoat the unvaccinated, and prop up these these horrible mandates, and and they knew and they did nothing.
And and in fact, When you look at their involvement, especially the journal, it looked like they were actively involved in that deception.
Speaker 0: Right. So you uncovered that the lead author, Fisman, has been on the payroll of Moderna and was given promotions. So was the university that, published the paper. They were later given money by the Canadian government in order to continue to research the pandemic. Can you Explain that conflict of interest and how that was not disclosed to the public.
Speaker 1: Well, actually, a lot of these conflicts of Trust are very public. So you look at, David Fisman, and he's basically Canada's, front man for pandemic modeling. So he was involved in modeling right in the beginning. Modeling. So he was involved in modeling right in the beginning, and he advised all levels of government, You know, municipal, provincial, federal.
And, during this time, he has a lot of connections to various pharmaceutical companies. He he served on a lot of Advisory boards, and the university itself, University of Toronto, was in partnership with Moderna. They They announced a big partnership with Moderna weeks before Fisman study came out, and they've you know, all universities here a lot of universities in Canada received a lot of grant money from the government to combat things like vaccine hesitancy. So these things were Pretty well known here. It's it's pretty open conflict of interest.
Speaker 0: Now you went Bit by bit to people to get this retracted to the medical journal, the University of Toronto, I believe, and even the fraud department. The I guess you would call it the Canadian version of the FBI. Right? Can you tell us what happened at each one of those?
Speaker 1: Right. So first, I went to the the journal because they published the study, and I asked for a retraction. And the journal was it wasn't just me who went The journal, dozens of of researchers and scientists in Canada asked for corrections to be made in that paper to be retracted. But, they pretty much ignored me, so I went to the University of Toronto. And University of Toronto has its own department for dealing with, research integrity, so they had to answer, you know, they had to, engage in dialogue with me.
And at first, they just tried to deny that they They, could deal with what Fisman did. So I actually had to go through their guidelines, research guidelines, and show them exactly in the policy where it They have to do something, and then they just try to deflect it. And then when I, you know, I went back to them, absolute proof this was Fraud, backed him into a corner, and they just closed the file. So at that point, I went to the funding agency because this This research was funded by the Canadian government. It was funded through CIHR.
So I asked them to investigate the researchers And to set the record straight because it had been used in our parliament to justify extending the travel restrictions. And what happened with, with CIHR is the president of CIHR, along with the presidents of, And CERC and and and and another department, they got together, and they they they voted not to set the record straight and to not investigate. And at that point, I had been doing a lot of research into these organizations, and I felt I had enough evidence to ask for a a police investigation. So I wrote a 150 page evidentiary report, and I sent it to the Ontario Provincial Police, their anti branch and asked for an investigation. So we were not open to that.
Speaker 0: Yes. You mentioned that you the person you sat Downwidth said, I've had 4 vaccines. I'm fine. Everyone's fine. This is not a big deal.
So can you lay out why this was a big deal. And that not just, oh, I couldn't go to the gym, but how there are recurring harms that happened. 1, because, The vaccine was not properly tested, and so we didn't have a risk benefit analysis of taking the vaccine. Scene. We didn't have informed consent.
And 2, because of the way that the unvaccinated were scapegoated and kept from their freedom.
Speaker 1: Right. So there's a lot to unpack there because the vaccines there there's there's issues with them on a lot of levels. So Fisman's study dealt Mostly with transmission. And so I my book does knock that down a lot because it was obvious Doesn't curtail transmission at all. And without that, there really is no justification for mandates.
And I go with that because if you have a potentially unsafe drug on the market, a potentially lethal, You know, drug. The the best line of defense is to simply not take it. So if they take that right away And you're forced to take it. Then you really don't have, you know, any defense against this. So in Canada, they made life Unbearable for the unvaccinated.
It wasn't just I couldn't go to the movies, and I couldn't go to the gym, or my kids, you know, couldn't Little restaurants. You know, my 2 oldest were in university at the time, and they were varsity level athletes. Both of them were banned from the university campus. They were both kicked out of varsity sports. They'd never competed again.
It Destroyed their their, you know, their varsity sports completely. And they were big athletes. They made it to nationals right before Before the pandemic was called, my youngest was isolated from everything. My husband, he's a federal employee, So the mandates affected him, and and and so he didn't work for most of 2022. My sister, She got fired from her position as a heart technician.
I mean, it was devastating. And, It it completely changed our life, but not just our life. Like, you know, millions, of people suffered under this and are still suffering. And when I went to, like, I took part in in the the Chukar Convoy, I went to that protest, like, 13 times. It was It was so uplifting because you had so many people together who finally had hope, you know, that that something was going to be done.
And I met a lot of people who suffered. I I met people who were vaccinated, and and and they were injured. And, you know, a lot of stories came out of that. So it was it was it was devastating. It's been very difficult here in Canada.
And Fisman's study sorry. Do you wanna
Speaker 0: No. No. Go ahead. Please go ahead.
Speaker 1: I was just saying that that Fisman's study Didn't just scapegoat the unvaccinated. It it didn't just, justify the mandates that were happening at the time. You could See that it was laying down the foundation, for for, you know, future mandates. It was giving you the Framework for the pseudoscience as to why, we should be able to mandate vaccines, Not just now, but in the future. And I found that so I feel I have to do something in order for my children to have a future here.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. You I wanna ask you one more question, and then I want to direct our, our viewers to this will continue as a redacted conversation over on our community at redacted.inc. I want you to just, before we continue this conversation, define what you mean by hate science, and what you think that the average person can do about it.
Speaker 1: So I hate science. I'm I'm looking at, you know, Fraudulent science done for the purpose of of harming a specific, group of of individuals. So in this case, we had, The fabric fabrication and falsification for the purpose of scapegoating unvaccinated Canadians and And and basically, taken away their rights and freedoms. So that was the purpose behind the science.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And and what we can do about it, well, what I've shown, and it's pretty clear here is that The establishment is not going to investigate itself. The establishment is not gonna stop doing what it's doing. So I think it's up to, individuals and and Gas grassroots movements to to do something about what is going on here. So I'm kind of hoping that my book, you know, exposes what's going on, But also gives people a sense of, you know, validation and empowerment to do something the way the way I have.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's a really interesting read. I think that anyone who's interested in understanding how we've been collectively manipulated, Related, Canada, 1 of the Worst, will enjoy this book. So thank you for writing it and bringing it to my attention. We're gonna continue this over on, as a redacted conversation.
So, on this live platform tonight, I'm gonna thank you for joining us, and then we'll continue the conversation after the show. Thank you so
Speaker 1: much. Thank you, Natalie. Thank you.
Speaker 2: I really hoped you enjoyed watching this video. You know, YouTube thinks that you'll actually like this next video Right here is personalized based on your own viewing habits. So if you watch the video, please leave a comment. Let us know what you think about it, And we will see you next time, everyone.
Speaker 0: It's meeting your new family doctor and feeling at ease. It's seeing your grand
Amazon.com
amazon.com
reSee.it AI Summary
Should we apply to have our Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit heard by the Supreme Court of Canada? Check out the Federal Court of Appeal's decision and our bombshell evidence. We've also filed a second lawsuit against the government. Read our statement of claim and open letters to key individuals. Get a full case breakdown and summary from our video with @jordanbpeterson, @rupasubramanya, and @PardyBruce. Donate to our legal fund and join our private Facebook group for updates. Follow me on Instagram and Twitter for more information.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
URGENT UPDATE - Vaccine Travel Mandates Lawsuits We need to hear your thoughts & feedback ASAP - Should we file and apply to have our landmark Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit heard by the Supreme Court of Canada? RELATED CASE & EVIDENCE LINKS 1. The Federal Court of Appeal released its decision: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1722716504335032758?s=20 2. Our bombshell evidence: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1732050791760871645?s=20 3. JENNIFER LITTLE - Career Bureaucrat - Headed up the secretive & covert 20-person 'Covid Recovery Team' at Transport Canada: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1689013817101910016?s=20 4. DR. CELIA LOURENCO - Director General, Health Canada - Personally approved the use of ALL C-19 vaccines in Canada: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1689630999930380288?s=20 ANOOUNCEMENT - WE JUST FILED A SECOND LAWSUIT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1730061973369311345?s=20 6. Statement of claim we filed for our new lawsuit on November 29th, 2023: https://statementofclaimfiledtofederalcourt.tiiny.site/ 7. Open letter to Jennifer Little, Head of the Covid Recovery Team (Official title at the time of the Vaccine Travel Mandates) and Dr. Celia Lourenco, Director General, Health Canada (Official title at the time of the Vaccine Travel Mandates): https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1732187127624978603?s=20 8. Open letter to @PierrePoilievre and @CPC_HQ: https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1713591822134526188?s=20 9. Full case breakdown and summary with @jordanbpeterson, @rupasubramanya and @PardyBruce: https://youtu.be/zQLMctYO36E?si=SicOSk4KwZq0qGdy Donate to our legal fund here: https://www.givesendgo.com/TheCanadianLitigationAndFreedomFund Our private Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/durhamdissident My Instagram account: https://www.instagram.com/therealshaunrickard/ My X (Twitter) account:
Video Transcript AI Summary
Sean Rickard, along with his co-applicant Carl Harrison, filed the first-ever lawsuit against the government for vaccine travel mandates. They have faced numerous challenges and motions, but have won most of them. However, their case was deemed moot by the Federal Court of Appeal due to a lack of public interest. Despite this setback, they have filed a second lawsuit as a damages claim. They are considering taking the case to the Supreme Court of Canada but are facing financial challenges. They are seeking donations to continue their fight. They believe they have evidence that proves the government had no scientific rationale for implementing the mandates. They are asking for feedback and support from the public.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome back. For those of you who don't know me and know or might be new here, and just started following along, my name is Sean Rickard. My co applicant and friend, Carl Harrison and I filed the 1st ever lawsuit against the government for the vaccine travel mandates, as a Charter Challenge. And, that case then was, followed by, Brian Peckford and Maxime Bernier through JCCF, who also filed lawsuits, and our friend, Nabil, out of Quebec, a lawyer there who is representing himself. The 4 cases at some point into the process were ordered to run concurrently.
So all these 4 cases we've been appearing simultaneously online and also in person. The situation that we're in right now, basically fast Forward from December 24, 2021, when we originally filed this, we're now coming into our 2nd year. As of December 24, it'll be our 2nd year fighting this 1st lawsuit, which has been a hell of a ride. We've had motions thrown at us By the attorney general and the crown, we've had, our our evidence attempt to be, dismissed. We fought and won pretty much every motion that they've thrown at us to try and exhaust our resources and our funding and everything else and except for 1.
And that was the, the final ruling by judge Gagne on a motion that the attorney general Asses, filed against us for mootness, saying that the case, because the mandates now have been Revoked, which they haven't. They've only been suspended. And the lack of public interest, they're saying that, The case is moot. We took that to the Federal Court of Appeal. We were unsuccessful there.
They have, they did concur with, Justice Gagne that the case was moot, again, based on lack of public interest, Which means they didn't feel it was worth the expense to the courts to have this case heard despite The fact that it affected the lives and negatively impacted the lives of CAD 6,000,000, 6,000,000 plus in actual fact. So we're we're in a situation now where, we went to the Federal Court of Appeal hearing. The they made it public via Zoom. We were able to get 20,000 people to register to watch this hearing via Zoom. Now for those of you unaware, may not sound like a large number to you, but it's the largest number of people ever to attend a court hearing in Canada at the Federal Court.
So for them to turn around and declare this to be, to for there to be a lack of public In this case, in this lawsuit is absolutely bullshit. I have no other word for it. It's insane. But And nevertheless, we're we're gonna prevail. We have to make a decision now, however, on this on our first case as to whether we're gonna seed to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The other 3 cases, Brian Peckford, Maxime Bernier and Nabil, they've all, They're not going to go any further. We're the only case going. We are the we were the lead case out of the 4 during the proceedings. Also, it was our, lawyer, very talented young lawyer, Sampras Velas, that was able to uncover the evidence that we have that we feel is imperative to be heard in a public hearing in a federal court. We uncovered the fact There was none.
There was no scientific evidence, there was no scientific rationale, there was no data, nothing provided by PHACC or any of the other health health organizations in Canada to to justify implementing the vaccine travel mandate. So we have all that. The only problem is we haven't had that evidence heard yet and we need to get that in front of a judge. So which is why we've just filed, Excuse me. On November 29th, our 2nd lawsuit, which is now a damages claim, we filed Again, on November 29th, and we're hoping to hear back.
The attorney general has accepted our challenge, so to speak, and we will be going to court on that. However, the Supreme Court of Canada hearing if we're if we're gonna if we're gonna file with the Supreme Court of Canada, We have to make a decision as to whether this is financially possible, whether we have the resources and the people to do this. But we feel that it's necessary that we need to file this and take it as far as we can, if for no other reason than To get it down on the record and down in the history books as for what it is, we have a ton of evidence, that proves that the government did not have any scientific rationale, or or data or anything to support them invoking the vaccine travel mandates. And, we did, probably was it just over 2 months of cross examinations of 16 government witnesses and the evidence that we uncovered from a lot of the senior public health officials including doctor Celia Lourenco, who authorized the use of all vaccines in Canada. You can look her up on my Twitter page.
There's a ton of information in there on her and another bureaucrat by the name of Jennifer Little who was tasked with, running an organization called the COVID recovery team, who were like a covert group whose job it was to try and find some science. Unfortunately, they failed, never came up with any of that and yet they implemented the mandates anyway and and prevented over 6,000,000 Canadians from being able to travel, within Canada and from leaving the country as well. So we feel it's imperative that we get this evidence in front of a judge as a as a secondary sort of backup measure. We have filed the 2nd lawsuit on November 29 this year, 2023. And, we're going to be heading into court I'm probably in the sometime in the New Year with that and we have to make a decision as of January 8, 2024, so this coming January, whether we're going to file with the Supreme Court of Canada.
The biggest problem we have right now is fundraising has pretty much died this year. And the reason being obviously, I would imagine is the economy. We also there's a lot of There's a bit of a lack of interest considering that people are allowed to travel now. So people have got comfortable with doing that and kind of put What happened in the past behind them, we get all that. And the economy, there's not much we can do and we're fully understanding of that.
Essentially, what I'm looking for from from all you out there, and a lot of you have been absolutely amazing, there's people donating monthly Athley and I've continued to do so since the outset of this thing. The support has been absolutely phenomenal. And we do want to see this Go the full run and to be heard in a court of law and justice to be done. But we can't do that without donations. And the donations I've dried up pretty much right now.
And, there is a link. If if you're able to donate, there's a link in my bio. I'll also if you're watching this on Rumble or YouTube, I'll put it in the description down below. I'll also include it in the Twitter, which is the best place to find me and the best place to get the most comprehensive information and updates that you can from us and news releases and that type of thing. So I'll put all of that, like I said, either in the description on Rumble and YouTube, or I'll put it in the body of the post.
And if you are able to donate to our GiveSendGo, then you can go, to my bio in both Instagram on Twitter, and I believe also on the Facebook page as well. But, again, I'll put it all in the descriptions wherever relevant, wherever you might happen to be watching this right now. So I need I guess we'll we need you to give us your feedback. Do do we take this to the Supreme Court of Canada. Do you think it's worth our while?
But the bottom line is at the end of the day, we need money and we need support to do this. So Let me know in the comments what you think. We've got to make a call, like I said, before January 8, because we need to prep our submissions and everything for the Supreme Court of Canada if we're gonna do this. If you feel that you're gonna be able to help them and help us push Push on with this, the original case and the new case, as as a sort of a secondary backup, if you like, then please let us know. We're not going to let it go.
We're going to keep pushing on. So I'll leave it right there, but please leave a comment down below, leave us your thoughts as to whether you think we should take this to the Supreme Court of Canada or not, and, Merry Christmas to everybody and, season's greetings,
The Canadian Freedom Litigation Fund
UPDATES - FEDERAL VACCINE TRAVEL MANDATES LAWSUIT - UNDERWAY AND PROCEEDING THROUGH THE FEDERAL COURT – STATUS: FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALThis podcast/interview...
givesendgo.com
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
facebook.com
Login • Instagram
Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.
instagram.com
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
JENNIFER LITTLE - Career Bureaucrat - Headed up the secretive & covert 20-person 'Covid Recovery Team' at Transport Canada - None of whom, including Little had any scientific or epidemiological backgrounds. Read the full official Federal Court transcripts from Jennifer Little's…
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
One of several smoking guns found during cross examinations of Senior Government Health Officials during our Lawsuit, irrefutable proof that the Trudeau Government lied. Dr. Lourenco - Director General, Health Canada - Personally approved the use of ALL C-19 vaccines in Canada.…
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Open letter to Jennifer Little, Head of the Covid Recovery Team (Official title at the time of the Vaccine Travel Mandates) and Dr. Celia Lourenco, Director General, Health Canada (Official title at the time of the Vaccine Travel Mandates). We would like to extend an…
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Shocker, Liberal's busted again, this time for corrupt covert propaganda assaults on Canadians Shame on these influencers too for selling their souls to the Devil, let's hope a detailed list of these scumbags is released to the public Calling all Whistleblowers
@mindingottawa - Blacklock's Reporter
DOCUMENTS: @GovCanHealth quietly paid $682K to Twitter influencers 'not required to reveal they are gov't paid because that would be embarrassing.' https://www.blacklocks.ca/feds-paid-twitter-stars-682k/ #cdnpoli @mferreriptbokaw
Feds Paid Twitter Stars $682K | Blacklock's Reporter
blacklocks.ca
reSee.it AI Summary
The petition has made history with 287,938 signatures, surpassing any previous House of Commons petition. The screenshot attached verifies this achievement. The petition remains open until December 24th, aiming for 500K signatures. Spread the word and follow @mferreriptbokaw for updates.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
We did it, history has been made - 287,938 signatures as of a few minutes ago. This petition is now the official record holder, receiving more signatures than any other House of Commons petition in history. I've attached a screenshot of the former record holder for comparison and verification. The petition is still open until December 24th, let's see if we can make it to 500K signatures: https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-4701 *Repost far and wide, let's keep this going. Follow @mferreriptbokaw for updates and next steps.
Petition e-4701 - Petitions
ourcommons.ca
reSee.it AI Summary
We filed a second lawsuit against the government, seeking damages. Our aim is to ensure that the extensive evidence we compiled from our original lawsuit on vaccine travel mandates is heard in a public hearing. The option to pursue damages was suggested by two federal court judges during our mootness hearings. Our intention was never to seek financial compensation, but rather to prevent the government from implementing unconstitutional mandates. We will provide a detailed explanation of our strategy in a video soon. You can find our Statement of Claim here: [link].
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
WE JUST FILED A SECOND LAWSUIT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT - Vaccine Travel Mandates In our new lawsuit, which we filed with the Federal Court today, we are now suing the Government for damages - Link to our Statement of Claim below. We have taken this unexpected path as it appears to be the only option we have left to potentially ensure that the extensive evidentiary record that we compiled from our original Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit will be heard in Federal Court, in a public hearing. This option was actually presented to us at our Mootness hearings, by both Justice Gagne (Federal Court) and Justice Locke (Federal Court of Appeal). Both Judges also went on to clearly state that the evidence from our original case could be submitted in any future damages claims or lawsuits. To be clear, right from the get go it was never our intention to seek financial compensation, we didn't want to appear to be looking to make any monetary gains from our lawsuit. It was always solely about ensuring that the Canadian government could never implement or invoke such tyrannical and unconstitutional mandates on Canadian citizens ever again. However, our seemingly compromised judiciary and so called legal system have essentially left us with no choice, not if we are to have any hope whatsoever of having our case heard at a public hearing anyway. I will shoot a video in the coming days when we all have more time to provide you all with a more detailed explanation and breakdown as to what our strategy is, and the rationale behind why we chose this new direction in our search for justice. You can review a copy of our Statement of Claim here: https://statementofclaimfiledtofederalcourt.tiiny.site/
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Lest we forget 2 They claim they never lied about the 'vaccines', well let's see now then shall we. We will never let these lying scum bags and gaslighters simply disappear into obscurity. Each and every one of these vile, corrupt and fascistic parasites will be held to account one day.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Pfizer's vaccine is 97% effective in preventing virus cases and can also prevent asymptomatic spread. Moderna's vaccine may cut down on transmission and has no severe allergic reactions. AstraZeneca's vaccine is up to 90% effective. Leading virologist Dr. Robert Malone's Twitter account has been banned. European countries have suspended the use of Moderna's vaccine due to possible side effects. Virginia Tech researchers found that doubling up cloth masks increases efficacy. The unvaccinated are now facing a crisis. A COVID outbreak on a cruise ship in Miami affected fully vaccinated individuals. Mixing different COVID vaccines is deemed safe and effective by some, but the World Health Organization advises against it. There are concerns about disinformation and conspiracy theories. The World Economic Forum's Davos agenda featured Chairman Xi and discussed globalization.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: By Pfizer has been shown to be 97% effective in preventing virus cases in Israel. New data also shows it's highly effective in preventing asymptomatic spread. The country's military also announced that it has become the 1st army in the world
Speaker 1: to achieve herd immunity. New results from Moderna suggest the vaccine could not only prevent you from getting sick with symptoms, but may also stop infection as well. Meaning, it could cut down on transmission of the virus. And on safety, the FDA noted there were no severe allergic reactions.
Speaker 2: Top story is late stage trial showing the AstraZeneca Oxford COVID vaccine can be up to 90% effective.
Speaker 3: The Twitter account of leading US virologist doctor Robert Malone has been bathed. Doctor Robert Malone is the inventor of the mRNA technology.
Speaker 4: One of the most qualified people in the world to talk about vaccines.
Speaker 5: The point is if if I'm not if if it's not okay for me to be part of the conversation even though I'm pointing out scientific facts that may be inconvenient, Then who is? Who can be spotted?
Speaker 6: Shares in Moderna and Pfizer sank on Wednesday after the European Union drug regulators said it was looking into possible new side effects the That includes kidney inflammation, an allergic skin reaction, and a renal disorder. It's also looking into menstrual disorders as a possible side in vaccines. The European Medicines Agency has not recommended any changes to the vaccine labels.
Speaker 7: Hello, everyone. Doctor Sunil Dand, internal medicine Sweden and Denmark have suspended use of the Moderna COVID nineteen vaccine.
Speaker 8: Germany, France, Spain, and Italy are all taking the precautionary measure suspending use of the vaccine because of fears about possible side effects, including blood clots.
Speaker 9: I really believe COVID has created a window of political opportunity and maybe an epiphany.
Speaker 6: It's capable of transmitting even from vaccinated individuals.
Speaker 10: Now Virginia Tech researchers found that doubling up these cloth masks in increases the efficacy from 50 to 75%. A 3 layer mask could walk up to 90% of the particles. Both ways.
Speaker 11: Putting a mask on a asymptomatic person, is not beneficial, obviously.
Speaker 4: Let me be clear. There is no place in our country for discrimination driven by fear or misinformation. In
Speaker 9: in police.
Speaker 8: Who? We.
Speaker 9: In
Speaker 12: There's a dire warning tonight from the parliamentary budget officer. Ejerou says the federal government's Deficit spending is unsustainable.
Speaker 13: But what we know is that we will end up with many more unemployed.
Speaker 6: How long have you worked at this school
Speaker 11: More more years. Because you were
Speaker 6: a teacher, and now you stick around because you love the kids so much.
Speaker 13: In
Speaker 4: As the numbers shared earlier clearly Joe, this is essentially now a crisis of the unvaccinated.
Speaker 14: COVID outbreak on a cruise ship that was recently docked in Miami. Almost every a single person of those who tested positive were reportedly fully vaccinated.
Speaker 13: And we know that, The 3 the 2 dose of the vaccine also have very limited protection in family.
Speaker 5: You're a scientist at Pfizer.
Speaker 15: You in You Na, what are you doing right now?
Speaker 5: You're on camera saying that the antibodies, if you got COVID, are better at that point than your vaccination. In right now.
Speaker 15: So here, antibodies are probably better at that rate than the vaccination.
Speaker 13: Oh, god.
Speaker 15: They probably in better from like, not better, but more anti skin attacks. Because
Speaker 9: here's the thing that's also a huge irony to me Is that all these Republicans and all of these folks who were anti shutdown are the same people who weren't Wearing masks who forced us to shut down in the 1st place.
Speaker 13: In in
Speaker 11: We continue to advise Ontarians that mixing of the mRNA vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna as well as mixing AstraZeneca and an mRNA vaccine is safe, it's effective, and it enables people to get their 2nd dose sooner.
Speaker 14: The World Health Organization's chief scientist on Monday advised against people and matching COVID nineteen vaccines from different manufacturers, calling it a dangerous trend.
Speaker 16: You're fighting for our rights and freedoms. And, right now it feels like we're a little bit at war, and those rights and freedoms are at stake.
Speaker 4: And is being directed by a lobbyist in Sydney. He's being paid by AstraZeneca and by Pfizer tens of 1,000,000 of dollars to get policy through to make sure the vaccine
Speaker 13: is is pushed. That's why.
Speaker 4: You asked the question. I gave you the answer. And that's my personal knowledge. I'm happy to make a statement here to the police or to anyone.
Speaker 1: In I was advised late yesterday afternoon, the Independent Commission Against Corruption will today, release a public statement in which it will state it is investigating about me concerning matters relating to the former member of the law firm. Therefore, it pains me to announce that I have no option but to resign from the office of premier.
Speaker 4: The in moments we're in. It's nice to be able to try and find someone to blame, something to point to, something to get mad at. We're seeing a lot of people fall prey to disinformation. And if conservative MPs and others want to start talking about Conspiracy theories? Well, that's their choice.
Speaker 2: Well, if that's the case, the conspiracy has certainly thickened because this week, Chris Gefreeland and Patty Haidu are among the vaunted speakers of the World Economic Forum's Davos agenda. The keynote speaker, the person who kicked things off Was none other than Chairman Xi. Yes. Xi Jinping spoke and actually tried to double down on the globalization the globalism that so many people are critical of. Remember this?
Speaker 17: This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality, and climate in
Speaker 13: When I mention our names like, even Vladimir Putin and so on, they all have been young global leaders of in But, what we are very proud of now is young generation like, prime minister Trudeau, in president of president of Argentina and so on, certainly penetrate the cabinets. So yesterday, I was at a reception for Prime Minister Trudeau and I would know that half of this cabinet or even more half of for our actually young double leaders of the world. And that's true in Argentina. Wow. Yep.
Sorry. That's true in Argentina as well. It's still in Argentina and, it's still in France now. I'm a vice president with the young global leader, but
Speaker 4: Should I just get it and And then they'll leave me alone and I can get to work and do my job. You're fooling yourself. This is the beginning of your rights being taken away.
reSee.it AI Summary
In a bombshell testimony, Maria Zack reveals shocking details about the 2020 US Federal Election. Her claims, supported by evidence, sound straight out of a Robert Ludlum novel. Curious if any action was taken? #USFederalElection #Testimony
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Bombshell sworn testimony from Maria Zack on the 2020 US Federal Election. What she exposes here is sinister & shocking to say the least. It sounds like it came right out of a Robert Ludlum novel, and she has the receipts to support her claims.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Maria Zak from Nations in Action presents evidence of alleged election interference in the United States. She claims that the Italian Secret Service received information from Arturo Della, who overheard discussions about stealing America's election. The Italian intelligence services investigated and arrested Arturo, who confessed to his involvement. Zak plays an audio recording of Larry Johnson discussing efforts to rescue Arturo and bring him to the United States to testify. She also implicates individuals from the US Embassy in Rome, a defense contracting firm called Leonardo, and Alexander Nix of Cambridge Analytica. Zak alleges that $400 million was moved through the Dubai Embassy by Barack Obama. She calls for further investigation into these claims.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Go ahead and move on to our presentation from, Maria Zak. And this is, talking about the elections. Go ahead.
Speaker 1: Good morning. I'm Maria Zak from Nations in Action, and we are an organization that's Devoted to transparent government, transformative politicians, trustworthy parties, and truthful media. The Italian Secret Service actually received information from Arturo's girlfriend he considers wife because they've been together so long. Her uncle is part of the Italian intelligence services. She said, uncle, Artura came home and said he doesn't understand why we're stealing America's election.
They immediately go to Leonardo and investigate. Arturo confesses. The Italian intelligence services reach out to us November 18th. They said something happened, we're watching a coup d'etat in the United States of America. They were fearful of meeting with anyone.
There were 2 affidavits that were delivered into Congress, and they were delivered from Italian citizens that contacted us. Intelligence agencies Had been trying to reach out because their country had already fallen, and that is what is happening around the world. The intelligence Agencies are watching corruption and China come in to theirs their countries and buying off politicians And hiding things and using fraud to do amazing efforts to take over and own property and in some instances, countries. So today I'm going to play for you an audio tape that should shock you all. It'll shock America.
This is the 1st place I have chosen to testify in. I could've walked into any state. I know my way around. We've already proven my credentials. I know government affairs.
I can walk in, and when I play this for you, and why Kansas? Because Kansas was a pro Trump victor of electors. But I would argue you don't know. You do not know the real result of your election. You also probably have not been made aware of what was occurring in Italy.
Leonardo, the defense contracting firm, had some strange occurrences happening with people coming in that the intelligence services witnessed of people coming from Frankfurt into the Italian US embassy in Rome on Via Veneto. This instance enabled individuals to come forward and supposedly, According to the Italian intelligence services, work with Leonardo to change the results of the United States election, But more frightening is that they claimed there were 47 to 52 presidential elections around the world, and they now have telemetry experts over 200 that speak experts over 200 that speak foreign languages that are all different. So what you are dealing with is a very calculated attempt To take down presidencies and control countries. So this audio that I'm about to play for you It's from an individual who was a member of the CIA and the State Department. His name is Larry Johnson.
Many of you may not know, but I am the person not only who hand delivered that letter to Donald Trump on Christmas Eve on in 2020, telling him who stole the election, where they stole it and how they stole it. And my number one goal was to bring back one of the people who was in the satellite center. His name was Arturo Della. Yeah. My goal was to rescue him and bring him over to America because he was willing to testify.
There were people that would not assist, That I thought would assist, but what was most shocking was this voice recording that I will play now.
Speaker 2: Maria, hi. Larry Johnson. We spoke yesterday. Listen, I needed to see if you would help us get in touch with the lawyer. Because after you talked to him yesterday, he went missing.
We have people in Italy now and are ready to have the person that's in jail. We've got a national security team that can extradite him and bring him back safely to the United States, so that's already lined up. There's no need for an airplane because the airplanes gonna be provided and witness protection provided. If you could call me at your convenience, 301442595
Speaker 1: that. That's our United States government, supposedly, national security, that are gonna go rescue Artura Delia. Anyone know about that? Probably not. Anyone?
Because most Americans had this truth hidden from them, that there was an operation supposedly, But the number one thing that they were looking for in the beginning of that message was where the lawyers were and the people who did the affidavits who were being hunted to be killed. These are brave people around the world that are trying to tell the truth and having great difficulty With the United States government apparatus. Telling the truth is not easy, and people are risking their lives. So that was the transcript. So you ask, okay, what proof is there?
Well, I would definitely consider that, sir, mister chairman and members. That is called proof. That needs an investigation. Where is our law enforcement? It should be at the local, state, and federal levels immediately to investigate Larry and the activities that he did in the United States during this whole event.
You know, everyone says if you see something, say something. Right? We're all Does it see something, say something, and then what happens? You get blasted. We had patterns of illegal activity across the country.
We had people not matching signatures on the ballots. We had witnesses galore filling out Davids. I am so proud of the team at Nations in Action because they filed many, many, many affidavits. They saw the computers actually online and there are photographs. So if anyone says the machines weren't online, that is false.
So these witnesses that have come forward Have also identified over 35,000 illegal cross county voting just in Georgia alone, and that relates to president Trump's talk with secretary of state Brad Raffensperger where he was saying, I know that there are votes there that were illegally cast. He was right. He is actually vindicated in the proof today because the cross reference with the state documents and the US Postal Service Feed shows that these people did not live where they actually voted. Those votes should have never been counted. Now we have illegal votes that are cast using fake residences and business addresses, photocopied identical ballots in stacks fed into tabulators and many fake unfolded unmailed absentee ballots.
Of the thousands of affidavits just filed in Georgia alone. Would you like to know how many arrests were made? 0. 0. All those great citizens who we ask to do us a favor and help us do our right to To go and volunteer to work polls had no no assistance at all In having a free and fair election, and they witnessed the failures of America.
So now you should be asking me, who are the people in Italy, Maria? Who are they that actually coordinated and conspired? Because this is where we really break things down and show you the proof proof of what occurred. Stefano Serafini on your left is actually a member of our state department who retired just days before the election. It is said that he in an intercept, it was picked up that he was retiring So he wouldn't lose his pension should he be caught.
He was coordinating with general Claudio Graziano. General Graziano is also the at the time was the EU commander, and they were meeting across the street at the St. Regis Hotel, And it was with Ignacio Moncada, who is the CEO of FATA, which is FATA SPA, Which is a subsidiary of Leonardo, one of the largest defense contracting firms in the world. They are the largest in Italy, and they've received numerous United States military and intelligence contracts. That should frighten everybody right now.
Now they were meeting in his hotel, and in March of 2020, They were coordinating this plan. The Italian intelligence services actually provided me with the cell phone number for the go order, And it goes to general Graziano. So then you ask, well, they concoct the plan, they have to go get the IT guys, Who's gonna do it? Well, they already had a guy. His name is Charles Robinson.
He is a telemetry expert, He came in a week prior to the election of November 2020. He uploaded Mil Spec software, and he had traveled from Frankfurt. He was working in there with Artura D'Alya. He is an IT guru In Italy, he's known as the smartest. The Italian Secret Service actually received information from Arturo's girlfriend he considers wife because they've been together so long.
Her uncle It's part of the Italian intelligence services. She said, uncle, Artura came home and said He doesn't understand why we're stealing America's election. They immediately go to Leonardo and investigate. Arturo confesses. What they don't know, what Arturo doesn't know and anyone else, the Italian intelligence services, this with the help of the financial guardia, we're conducting the investigation, and they said they were there to check for financial fraud.
So they were checking all the other employees saying, hey, you got anything? What's going on around here? Any financial fraud? And 1 guy was a little nervous and he said, I don't have financial fraud, but something strange happened in the satellite center I'd like to confess. There was actually a second person in his name we had named Beta.
Beta confessed to the Italian secret service corroborating the entire story that Arturo D'Alegio told to the intelligence services of Italy. This is Arturo. Arturo was hiding in the facility for 18 days Well, I tried to rescue him. I am just a citizen. I am not agency.
I shouldn't have to go Do this for my country, but I will bleed for my country. And I had an opportunity to bring the witness and try to rescue him before he would be murdered leaving Italy. For 18 days, we hit him, and I personally funded and took money out of my retirement To do this. I can tell you that I was at The Last Straw, made a recommendation in the beginning of December To drop an article in Italy because I didn't know what else to do. I couldn't get to anyone.
And I have 30 years of experience, And I had to wonder why is it that a lot of the elected officials I went to are so afraid of me coming out with this information? It didn't matter if they were Democrats or Republicans because I know everyone. I know Stacey Abrams. I know Brian Kemp. I know them all, and they've known me for years, and they've known me to be a very honest person.
I will bleed for my country, and I will not cover for my party or any individual that I consider a friend because we are at war, And that is what America deserves. So I dropped the recommendation and strategy to drop the article in Italy. The day the article dropped, All hell broke loose in Italy. They immediately put out for the arrest of Arturo degliya, and they arrested and jailed him. They fired their head of Cyber security for the country, and they fired the head of telecom for the country.
Oh, just on one day when I dropped one little article. Isn't that amazing? I'm sure that's just totally pure coincidence. So the timeline, We did an extensive timeline of what was occurring as this was happening. We knew that the meetings were taking place from March of 2020 and then into the summer.
November the 1st week of November, the crew arrived to the US Embassy. There were data thrusts during the election because they said they couldn't keep up with all the votes and switching them. It was, through the use of the Galileo satellite that was taken offline to load the Mil Spec software. And let me make it very clear, I also own an IT company, I have friends who are both SEAL Team 6 former members that are communications and IT specialists. You have a document in your folder that explains how the satellites can be used.
There are many methods. Anyone get DISH Network? Anyone get satellite TV. It's the same thing. So I'm gonna make it real easy for you because I'll tell you, IT can be a bit complex.
And so they loaded the software, they used it, Artura goes home and tells his, significant other, the Italian intelligence services reach out to us November 18th. They said something happened, we're watching a coup d'etat in the United States of America. They were fearful of meeting with anyone. The Italian government heads changed and did the arrests of the Sparkle Telecom cert, and then the c, CIA operatives fled immediately from the embassy, the same day as the article dropping. That is not coincidence.
This is one of the gentlemen, if you notice the sneaker, same guy. That picture is from the United States Rome Embassy. Nobody can get that picture unless you're Italian intelligence services. The camera's super high up, it is a secured facility, secured item. They sent me that photo.
They were sending me documents and sending me photos. Because they knew there was nobody in the United States Rome embassy that they could trust. And that is a sad sad day for America to wake up to this reality. It is not partisan, I will remind everyone. This is a whole different operation in a whole different war we are fighting.
These are the other operatives that were fleeing on that day. They told the ticket the agent that they were returning back to Frankfurt, which confirmed everything. Leonardo actually had their facility, their, Secure facility for all of their cloud services in Frankfurt, and they recently moved it, But at the time, it was in Frankfurt. They're also looking at renaming Leonardo and breaking it into pieces as we speak. Sound familiar?
Maybe something that used to be called Facebook? So then we have the Gentleman in the center. There's a gentleman with a very large bicep, and you would say, Why do we care about that gentleman's bicep? We care a lot about that gentleman because that gentleman is out of Canada. He is not an American, he is Canadian.
These gentlemen, this one in particular, we received an A tip immediately that this gentleman, Charles Robinson, had confessed to stealing races in Arizona as early as early 2000, including Janet Napolitano's race for governor. He returned back to Canada with a brand new sports car and confessed to a fellow coworker while he was working at one point for Dominion, Then he was not working for Dominion, then he went back to Dominion, and then he left and was working for another company. This gentleman Has an extraordinary large bicep. He's very well known by this source. This source worked with Canadian Law enforcement who seem to be a lot more willing than our federal agencies, and they started tracking the gentleman.
The sources claim that this is the guy who is so brilliant as a telemetry expert that he was able To load the software and change the votes. He now has 3 women and there are people hunting him because people have followed my work and sadly, some of them have done things that are, in my opinion, treasonous. They have gone to Italy under the guise of collecting money to go do an investigation on Italy, and they've taken this information and gone and gotten massages, rented villas, this. And they've also gotten people inspired to go hunt this guy down as well as Stefano Serafini from the US Embassy. Serafini is still in Italy.
He does not return to his McLean, Virginia home because he knows there are Americans looking for him. In my opinion, that was very wrong to incite Americans to go after and hunt these people, but Americans are desperate For politicians and law enforcement to do something. So I beg of you to work with law enforcement and make something happened after this presentation because there's too much proof to not have it happen. Now for Alexander Nix. That name should be familiar to all of you.
He was very involved in races in 2016 and prior. He was involved in the Cruz campaign, he was involved in the Trump campaign, and he was fined in part of the use of people's data from Facebook, a huge massive fine that Mark Zuckerberg had to pay. And I always found it odd, why would Mark Zuckerberg be working with the IT guy from Cambridge Analytica out of London, and yet They're working to help Republicans. That doesn't seem to make sense because mister Zuckerberg seems to be on the other side. Well, the Italian intelligence services immediately started giving me downloads on all the people, including sending me their picture and phone numbers out of their phones, Showing and verifying that they not only knew who they were, they had relationships.
1 person actually drove Alexander nicks to the CEO's office at Leonardo in Italy. Now you must ask yourself, why Would an IT guy who has a voter technology actually be going to a defense contracting firm In Italy. Doesn't make sense, does it? No. It doesn't.
And so you have to ask, okay, so Alexander Nix, Is the MI6 like the Italian intelligence services says? Was he in meetings in America with CISA, the security association that was insuring our elections. I am told that he was actually given permission and attendance of our election integrity and security meetings in the United States federal government as late as October of 2020. And he is a British citizen. He is not American, and he ran an IT company as his cover called Cambridge Analytica, where there are movies by Britney Kaiser and others, Chris Wiley, who are 2 very liberal democrats who came out, they saw something and they said something.
And these people know something is wrong, and they have written books, and I highly recommend reading those. So while this was going on, the Italian intelligence services started telling me how things were breaking down in Italy, and the Italian government was going to collapse. I am not one who's ever received an intelligence briefing in my life. I was a lobbyist state lobbyists. You know many of people just like me.
And so all of a sudden, I'm being told that Joe Biden called Matteo Renzi, who was the former prime minister prior to the collapse of the government, and he said, I need you to take down Giuseppe Conte as the prime minister. Within 3 weeks, Giuseppe Conte was down, and Italy was in total chaos. That is proof that the intel intercepts that I was receiving were factual. No. Was not real happy about going down, but he was given 1,000,000 of dollars, we were told, in a California bank.
These are banking issues as well. There were movements and pallets of cash, including the information that I supplied the special counsel, John Durham. You are the 1st government agency that I am making this very clear to everyone. John Durham is in possession of documents from me that include the moving of pallets of cash by Barack Obama Through the Dubai Embassy, our United States government CIA agent was present, $400,000,000 were moved from there with the help of Italians and the financia guardia in Italy knows, And they supplied the names of the people in the room, and now we need you to get your United States senators and your congressional delegation. And I don't care what party they are, and they need to work together because stealing from the American families in Kansas is wrong.
And they stole $400,000,000 and put it in the Merrill Lynch in Geneva, Switzerland. That is evidence that is sitting before us today. This story gets worse and more horrifying for the citizens of Kansas and America. So we knew that the plot was going to continue. They were gonna try to kill Artura dahlia.
We knew that they were chasing the Italians that were helping us. They have been threatened. They have been in car chases. They have had their cars roll over and people injured, and there have been many Italians who have been murdered. Five government officials in March alone were murdered, including an ambassador.
A brand new appointment to the cabinet was murdered the very day he was appointed. With that, mister chairman, I yield the floor for questions.
Speaker 0: Okay. Do we have questions?
Speaker 3: You have us a lot. It's Hard to to grasp everything, all you're saying, and a lot of it's very new for us.
Speaker 1: Yes, sir.
Speaker 3: Going to Italy and the Leirondo, if I'm understanding what you're saying, Is that that satellite there could send the codes, and they can, Effect and change elections, not only United States but around the world. Is that did I understand that correctly?
Speaker 1: Yes, sir.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Does anyone know if anything ever came of this?
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
If you don't reach for a Kleenex before this video ends, you're either dead or a complicit Trudeau socialist moron. https://youtu.be/rPDX3cm7hhI?si=w69wi37JAWtYSUtu
reSee.it AI Summary
The Federal Court of Appeal has rejected the appeal from challengers of the travel vaccine mandate. The court upheld the ruling that dismissed the lawsuits against the Liberal government, citing "mootness." The appellants argued that the mandate could be reinstated, but the court deemed it highly speculative. The decision means there will be no justice for the appellants and the millions of unvaccinated Canadians affected by the travel restrictions. The evidence presented during the proceedings showed that the mandate was stringent compared to other countries and was intended to drive vaccine uptake.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
From @NChartierET at Epoch Times Federal Court Rejects Appeal from Travel Vaccine Mandate Challengers The Federal Court of Appeal has upheld the ruling of a lower court which declared that lawsuits against the Liberal government for its travel vaccine mandate can be dismissed due to "mootness." Justice George Locke wrote in his Nov. 9 decision that there was no “palpable and overriding error” in the October 2022 decision made by Federal Court Justice Jocelyne Gagné. Justice Locke said that “this Court can intervene only in the case of a palpable and overriding error by the Federal Court, or an extricable error of law.” He added that many arguments from the appellants are “directed to urging this Court to decide for itself whether to exercise discretion. Again, that is not our role.” Justice Locke was supported in his decision by the two other judges who sat on the panel which heard from the appellants on Oct. 11. Four groups of Canadians have challenged the federal vaccine mandate for travel, which was in place from October 2021 to June 2022. Shortly after the Liberal government suspended the mandate, the Attorney General filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuits over "mootness," arguing there was no longer any live controversy to adjudicate. Justice Gagné agreed, saying the appellants had received the remedies sought given the mandate was not in place anymore and that “no important public interest” existed to justify using court resources on the matter. During the October hearing, appellants sought to challenge the notion that there is no important public interest, citing the fact that the government mandate was only suspended and could be brought back. “I find no merit in this argument,” said Justice Locke. “The appellants’ argument based on that threat was considered by the Federal Court but dismissed as highly speculative.” He added “there is a difference between a case that raises an issue in which many people are personally interested in having a decision, and a case that raises ‘an issue of public importance of which a resolution is in the public interest.’” Appellants have argued that approximately six million Canadians were denied mobility rights during the mandate and want the court to rule on the constitutionality of the matter. “In 2022, this sub-class of citizens, the non-vaccinated, found themselves assimilated to Cubans under Fidel Castro's regime,” said appellant Nabil Ben Naoum during the Oct. 11 hearing. “These six million citizens, of which I am one ... found themselves prisoners of their country. I repeat this because all too often I have encountered people who have not grasped the full implications of the debate.” Other appellants include former Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford, PPC Leader Maxime Bernier, and businessmen Karl Harrison and Shaun Rickard. Mr. Peckford and Mr. Bernier are represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). Allison Pejovic, a lawyer funded by the JCCF, said the two men are “disappointed” by the decision. “The consequences of this decision is that there will be no justice for the Appellants and millions of unvaccinated Canadians whose lives were turned upside down by the federal government’s decision to prohibit them from travelling across the country and from leaving Canada,” she told The Epoch Times in a statement. Mr. Rickard said in an interview he disagrees his case is of no public interest and noted the record amount of people who signed up with the court to watch the live hearing remotely. “These three judges claim there was no public interest in our case,” he said. "Give me a break. This is outrageous and absurd." The judicial proceedings for the cases saw multiple government witnesses providing evidence in regard to why and how the vaccine mandate was put in place. The evidence shows the federal government sought to impose a “world-leading” and “one of the strongest” vaccine mandate, which effectively remained an outlier amongst other countries in terms of stringency. Government officials also testified that Health Canada had not recommended a mandate, that ethics had not been considered, and that there was little to no data suggesting it would prevent the spread of in-flight transmission of the virus. The mandate, however, was considered a “catalyst” to drive vaccine uptake. Noé Chartier Author @PierrePoilievre @CPC_HQ #canpoli #onpoli
reSee.it AI Summary
The Federal Court of Appeal has dismissed our appeal in the Federal Vaccine Travel Mandate lawsuit, citing a lack of public interest. However, 20,000 Canadians registered and attended the landmark lawsuit via Zoom, setting a record for the most attendees in Canadian history. Despite this, the judges claim there was no public interest. The government and media seem to be suppressing the evidence, and our compromised judicial system may have bowed to their requests. This lawsuit is crucial, but the media has never reported on it. We need our judicial system to hold officials accountable for these unconstitutional mandates. Supreme Court of Canada, here we come!
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
BREAKING: The Federal Court of Appeal has released its decision, dismissing our appeal to the declaration of mootness in our Federal Vaccine Travel Mandate lawsuit. We are regrouping right now, I will post the Judge's ruling as soon as I have a link to the entire PDF that I can post here on X. In a nutshell, one of the primary reasons given yet again was 'A lack of public interest' in the case. Let me tell you something about that in the meantime, 20,000 Canadians went out of their way to register, sign up and attend this landmark lawsuit via Zoom, meaning that our lawsuit and appeal hearing literally set a Canadian record for the most people to ever register & attend a Federal Court hearing in the entire history of this country. Hundreds of thousands more followed the case closely on various social media platforms hoping to see justice served for themselves and all those who's lives & livelihoods were negatively impacted by the heinous & tyrannical vaccine travel mandates. Yet these three Judges claim there was no public interest in our case, give me a break, this is outrageous and absurd. In my opinion the government have petitioned the courts, Judges and MSM to have this evidence buried forever at any cost, and sadly once again our seemingly compromised judicial system and Justices may have folded to their overlords requests. Our lawsuit is one of the most important legal challenges in recent Canadian history, and yet the Canadian legacy media have never reported on this case, not once have they so much as uttered a word about it over the past 2 years, likely once again at the behest of their government overlords/financiers. This despite all of the bombshell evidence which was uncovered by our legal team during the cross examinations of 16 of the government's very own medical experts and senior public health officials, over a 2.5 month period, which exposed the Trudeau Government's lies regarding their fabricated reasons/rationales for invoking said mandates. I fear that until our judicial system is restored and gets back on track, it's highly unlikely that any of our corrupt sociopathic elected officials & bureaucrats will ever be held accountable in a court of law for their part in invoking & enforcing these unconstitutional, heinous, illegal and tyrannical mandates. Supreme Court of Canada, here we come!
reSee.it AI Summary
206 MP's voted against Bill C-278, preventing future vaccine mandates in Canada for federally regulated sectors and transportation. Canadians must voice their opinions on these tyrannical actions. Check the link for the full list: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/434
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Here is a list exposing the names of all 206 MP's who voted against Bill C-278, the Private Member’s Bill to Prevent Future Vaccine Mandates in Canada for all Federally regulated sectors and transportation. These charlatans need to hear what the Canadian public think about their heinous tyrannical actions. https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/434
Vote Detail - 434 - Members of Parliament - House of Commons of Canada
Vote Detail - 434 - Members of Parliament - House of Commons of Canada
ourcommons.ca
reSee.it AI Summary
An open letter to several Canadian politicians, including Pierre Poilievre and Maxime Bernier, urges them to address a landmark lawsuit against Justin Trudeau's vaccine travel mandates. The lawsuit challenges the government's fabricated reasons for implementing the mandates. The appellants recently presented their case in the Federal Court of Appeal, arguing against a previous ruling that declared the case moot. They emphasized the impact on unvaccinated Canadians' mobility rights and questioned the constitutionality of the mandates. The court's decision will determine whether the case proceeds or goes to the Supreme Court.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
*Share this post widely. Open letter to, @PierrePoilievre, @LeslynLewis, @MelissaLantsman, @Roman_Baber, @RachaelThomasMP and et al @CPC_HQ - A public response is respectfully requested. My co-applicant, Karl Harrison & myself, Brian Peckford, Maxime Bernier, Nabil Ben Naoum and 6 million of our fellow Canadians would like to know if at any point you plan to finally stand up in the HoC to speak up and publicly address our landmark lawsuit against Justin Trudeau's heinous and vindictive vaccine travel mandates? Our ongoing lawsuit is one of the most important legal challenges in recent Canadian history. The Canadian legacy media have been ordered to never report on it, under any circumstances, despite all of the bombshell evidence which was uncovered by our legal teams during the cross examinations of 16 of the government's very own medical experts and senior public health officials, which exposed the Trudeau Government's lies regarding their fabricated reasons/rationales for invoking said mandates. We are currently potentially facing unprecedented judicial injustice due to the blatant biases and partisanship of our seemingly heavily compromised and skewed so called 'justice system', yet all of you at the CPC continue to hide in the shadows and remain silent on this very serious and important issue, and we'd like to know why? I would hazard a guess that at least one of you observed the proceedings via Zoom, or at the very least had someone attend on your behalf to watch and report back to you with a summary. If this was in fact the case, your response would be very much appreciated, or at the very least it might act as a show of good faith and acknowledgement to the 6 million Canadians who's lives and livelihoods were heavily impacted and negatively affected by Trudeau's tyrannical, 100% unscientific, and as our evidentiary record cleary demonstrates, nothing more than politically motivated mandates. You all have an opportunity to do the right thing here and prove once and for all to ALL Canadians that you care and are in fact supportive of fighting for and protecting Canadians charter rights, should you choose to do so. We await your response - Thank you. FYI: On Wednesday October 11th, 2023 our lawsuit broke a Canadian record for the largest number of people ever registering to watch a Federal Court of Appeal hearing. The Court Zoom team confirmed that 19,000+ Canadians had registered to watch the hearing live. SUMMARY OF OUR RECENT HEARING IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL IN OTTAWA Travel Vaccine Mandate Challengers in Court to Contest Previous Mootness Ruling. "Challengers to the now-repealed travel vaccine mandate pleaded before the Federal Court of Appeal on Oct. 11 to overturn a previous court decision declaring their case was moot. Four different groups of appellants made their case in front of a panel of three judges, each taking various approaches to challenge the previous ruling made by Justice Jocelyne Gagné in October last year. Quebec lawyer Nabil Ben Naoum, who represents himself, sought to impress upon the appeal judges what it meant to not be vaccinated during the mandate period from October 2021 to June 2022. He argued that those who didn’t receive a COVID-19 vaccine were captive within Canada due to planes, trains, and commercial passenger marine vessels being off-limits. The U.S. also blocked access to non-vaccinated travellers at that time. The only way for unvaccinated Canadians to leave the country was to "paddle in a row boat across the ocean," said Mr. Ben Naoum. He added that this “sub-class” of unvaccinated citizens was akin to Cubans under Fidel Castro. Mr. Ben Naoum also asked how the government could withhold fundamental human rights, hand them back at the eleventh hour, and then claim the issue is moot and shouldn't be examined by the court. The federal travel vaccine mandate was lifted on June 20, 2022, and eight days later the attorney general (AG) filed a mootness motion in order for the cases not to be heard by the court. Justice Gagné essentially agreed with all the arguments presented by the government. She declared that the applicants had “substantially received the remedies sought,” given the mandate had been repealed. This issue of there being no public interest is an angle that was tackled by the counsels representing other parties in the mandate challenge in order to question Justice Gagné’s ruling. There is therefore “no live controversy to adjudicate,” she wrote. “There is no important public interest or inconsistency in the law that would justify allocating significant judicial resources to hear these moot Applications. ”'Significant' Public Interest Other parties include businessmen Karl Harrison and Shaun Rickard, who were the first to file a challenge to the mandate in December 2021, PPC Leader Maxime Bernier, and former Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford and co-applicants. Attorney Sam Presvelos, representing Mr. Harrison and Mr. Rickard, pleaded that Justice Gagné had made three errors in her decision, including that she did not consider the “significant” public interest in the judicial applications. Justice George Locke, who was presiding the hearing, asked to clarify whether Mr. Presvelos wanted him to accept that Justice Gagné made her ruling without having the public interest in mind. “How could that be?” he asked. Mr. Presvelos pointed to Justice Gagné’s decision, which said the “important public interest” is “alleged.” Mr. Presvelos argued that the case is larger than the rights of the appellants or the general public who remained unvaccinated, which numbers in the millions. He said he believes that Canadians would be “very interested” to know whether or not a medical procedure could be imposed as a condition to access federally regulated services. Allison Peijovic, a lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms representing Mr. Bernier and Mr. Peckford, centred her arguments around jurisprudence on the issue of mootness, established in Borowski v Canada (AG) in 1989. Challengers want the court to determine whether the imposition of the travel mandate was constitutional, given the impacts on mobility rights and the security of the person as it pertains to bodily autonomy. She argued that Justice Gagné did not fully analyze her clients’ applications against that jurisprudence, which addresses issues of whether a live controversy between parties remains. Constitutionality Ms. Peijovic remarked that her client Mr. Peckford is the only living signatory of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He attested that the interim orders implementing the mandate violated his charter rights. Ms. Peijovic said the court must pronounce itself on the matter, otherwise, Canadians remain in “limbo.” If they don’t know where the court stands on the lawfulness of the mandate, she said some are wondering whether they should move out of Canada. She said the appellants want to know whether their freedom to leave Canada is conditional on taking a novel medication still undergoing testing. COVID-19 vaccines were brought to market under special authorization without having gone through full clinical trials. Pfizer also used different processes to manufacture the product that was used in clinical trials and the one that was widely distributed across the world. Justice Canada senior general counsel J. Sanderson Graham assured the Federal Court of Appeal that no errors were made in this case. Mr. Graham agreed with the appellants’ argument that the government has left open the door to bring back mandates in response to circumstances, but he said the court could not “engage in speculation” or pass judgement on speculation. “We can only look at what happened,” he said, and the measures were repealed. Because of that, there are no live controversies, said Mr. Graham, and the function of the court is to decide “real disputes” that affect the rights of individuals. He said that Justice Gagné was right in her interpretation of Borowski and the economy of judicial resources. There is no tangible relief that can be provided to the applicants, he said. If the panel of judges, which Justices George Locke, Nathalie Goyette, and René Leblanc, sides with the appellants, the case will be sent back down to federal court to be heard. If it upholds the mootness ruling, appellants could decide to go to the Supreme Court. Appellants want to have their day in court, having collected thousands of pages of evidence from government witnesses and experts, on everything from the approval process for vaccines in Canada to ethical considerations being applied before imposing a mandate. The evidence collected shows that the Transport Canada official in charge of crafting the travel mandate policy had not considered whether it was ethical to implement it. There was also no recommendation of public health authorities to impose a mandate, said the official during cross-examination." Noé Chartier Author Noé Chartier is a senior reporter with the Canadian edition of The Epoch Times. Twitter: @NChartierET #canpoli #onpoli @CTVNews @CP24 @CBCNews @globalnews @nationalpost @globeandmail @TheTorontoSun @Harry__Faulkner @brianlilley @CityNewsTO
reSee.it AI Summary
Left-wing host Sid Seixeiro passionately expresses his disgust over the Trudeau Liberals' standing ovation for SS Nazi remarks in the HoC. His emotional outburst on live TV highlights the incompetence, hypocrisy, and insanity of the Liberal government. Sid's courage to speak out deserves recognition. TrudeauMustResign. TrudeauMustGo. TrudeauNationalDisgrace.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Some of you may need to sit down for this. Left wing @breakfasttv host, Sid Seixeiro unleashes his disgust and anger regarding the Trudeau Liberals heinous SS Nazi standing ovation debacle in the HoC last week, live on Breakfast Television of all places. Listen to his voice breaking, these are legitimate emotions and concerns. Finally a left wing MSM commentator acknowledging the incompetence, hypocrisy & insanity of the Liberal government for what it is. More importantly, Sid spoke out about it on live TV, as he and ALL other MSM Journalists with even a shred of integrity should. A tip of the hat to Sid Seixeiro. #TrudeauMustResign #TrudeauMustGo #TrudeauNationalDisgrace
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the House of Commons, the speaker apologized for honoring a Ukrainian veteran who was later revealed to have fought for the Nazis in World War 2. The speaker should step down, and the prime minister's office should explain their involvement. People quickly found out about the incident online. This is unacceptable and insulting, especially on the eve of Yom Kippur. The Liberal Party will lose support if this continues. It was lazy and put many people in a bad spot, including Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Sincere apologies and action are needed to address this international embarrassment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This past Friday in our House of Commons, an incident took place that a lot of the country here is talking about, so so are we. The speaker of the house apologized after the fact for honoring a Ukrainian veteran who, it was later revealed, fought for the Nazis in World War 2. I would be seeing a a lot of shades of color today. I have to be honest with you. Here's what here's what I think should happen today.
Anthony wrote as Speaker needs a step down. That's on that's a mistake I'm not going to let go. He needs a step down. Secondly, the prime minister's office that have passed the buck on this in every statement I've seen. I need I need, like, a 5 to 10 minute explanation from the prime minister today on this.
I nothing happens in a ceremony like that without the PMO knowing. Nothing. The the party Quebecois, the conservatives, Jagmeet Singh, no one has control over that. No one else has control over that. That's our prime minister.
That's the prime minister's office. They're running that, too. So I want an explanation from them because that's ridiculous. Point 3. Google stuff.
People around North America within 3 minutes of that happening went on Google and figured it out. I don't know what's going on in our nation's capital right now, but I've had it. And to everyone in the Liberal Party, I'm going to take a different root here. October of 2025 is scheduled to be our next election in this country. Okay?
I know there are people running, the federal liberals. And it's And it's not just the cliche, you know, in in the mahogany rooms with the cigars and the brandy who actually run things in that party. To all the people in that party, you are gonna comes third party status in this election if this stuff keeps going on. This is an insult to a lot of people in this country. On the eve of Yom Kippur, this happened on the eve of 1 of the holiest days on the calendar for a lot of Jewish people in this country.
This is unacceptable And stuff has to happen. And I don't want to see people hiding behind statements today. This is ridiculous. Okay. I come out I rip off conservatives a lot.
I can't let this go. This is this was lazy. This was ridiculous. And it put a lot of people in a bad Spot, including Volodymyr Zelenskyy, I can't believe that took place. And there needs to be repercussions for that.
With that said, hopefully, Tam, hopefully, Meredith, hopefully, Debo. We see some real sincere apologies and action today. I don't I don't need just the apologies. It needs to be action today, this is an international embarrassment for this country in a big moment, and there needs to be repercussions for that.
reSee.it AI Summary
The Federal Court of Appeal in Ottawa has issued an important update regarding the vaccine travel mandates mootness hearing. A new web link has been provided for registration. The total number of registered individuals is expected to exceed 10,000. Canadians impacted by the mandates are urged to register, demonstrating widespread support. Two primary rationales for declaring the lawsuit moot have been shared. Attendees can register via a direct Zoom link. Full details can be found on social media platforms. Repost and share this vital information. Shaun and Karl.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
Very important update and letter addressed to the public from the Federal Court of Appeal (FCOA) in Ottawa. The letter attached addresses all of those who have already registered to watch our vaccine travel mandates mootness hearing live via Zoom on October 11th, 2023, and all those who still plan to do so - You will find a new web link provided by the FCOA to register below. The last update as to the total number of people who have registered thus far was 6,000, however this number was received over two weeks ago. After numerous attempts to get an updated total, I finally received an e-mail from a Clerk at the court late last week stating that they are no longer allowed to provide us with anymore updated totals. Our Lawyer is now looking into this for us. I can only assume that due to the success of the registration campaigns I've been running on various SM platforms, including here on X, that the total number of persons registered for the Zoom is currently well in excess of 10,000, however I cannot confirm this as of right now of course. It is imperative that ALL Canadians, who's lives & livelihoods were negatively impacted by the heinous & tyrannical vaccine travel mandates (and likely will be again this Fall/Winter) register to attend in-person or virtually. This will clearly demonstrate to the Canadian Judicial system, Judges, government officials and the media just how extensive the support and public interest is in this landmark case/lawsuit. Even if you're unsure whether or not you'll be busy that day, please register anyway, you are in no way obligated to attend if you can't make it. IMPORTANT REMINDER: Two of the primary rationales given by Justice Gagne for declaring our lawsuit moot last September are attached and can be seen below, but let me explain a little further. 1. [47] As a result, the Court is of the view that the judicial economy considerations outweigh the alleged important public interest and uncertainty in the law. = Justice Gagne felt that a public 5-day hearing would be a waste of court resources and that the financial costs would not be justified or warranted. 2. [49] There is no important public interest or inconsistency in the law that would justify allocating significant judicial resources to hear these moot Applications. = Justice Gagne felt that there would be no public interest in the case, and therefore it would be a waste of the court's time and resources. You can register here to attend live via Zoom, this is now a direct Zoom registration link set up by the court, it literally takes seconds to register: https://cas-satj.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_VehMKVguTaaZ5YIlZPMN3A Full details on the hearing here: https://twitter.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1697249721109393719?s=20… and here: https://twitter.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1688907098850021376?s=20… Please repost and share this information here on X and on all of your other social media platforms. Thank you, Shaun & Karl
reSee.it AI Summary
Check out @DrDMartinWorld's bone-chilling presentation exposing the WHO as a criminal organization. On September 13th, 2023, a panel provided evidence confirming Covid as a bioweapon. Don't miss this eye-opening revelation!
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
I strongly urge everyone who has not yet seen this recent bone-chilling presentation by @DrDMartinWorld do so immediately - And yes, he has the receipts. On September 13th, 2023, a panel bravely exposed the WHO (World Health Organization) for the criminal organization it is, and proved that Covid is indeed a bioweapon.
Video Transcript AI Summary
A speaker accuses the World Health Organization (WHO) and pharmaceutical companies of being part of a criminal cartel that aims to enrich themselves while harming humanity. They claim that the WHO has a history of criminal behavior and provide evidence to support their claims. The speaker argues that the COVID-19 pandemic was not a public health crisis but a planned genocide orchestrated by the WHO and its collaborators. They highlight the funding, planning, creation, and profit from the pandemic as evidence of criminal activity. The speaker calls for the dismantling of the WHO and an end to their criminal actions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A very small number of criminal industrial conspirators decided to subordinate the entirety of the human population for the purpose of their sinister plans to enrich themselves while impoverishing and killing the rest of humanity. And I'm done being polite. We've long passed polite. When the words acceptable death rate become part of an industrial norm, we have lost the plot of humanity. And that's not my words.
Those were the words of the World Health Organization and of Pfizer and of Moderna when they were given the authorization to begin the process of killing human beings in the interest of advancing their goals. Next slide. And I'm also not going to sugarcoat this. This is a criminal cartel. We are acting as though there's some sort of redeemable quality somewhere in some esoteric layer that somehow or another the World Health Organization must have some salutatory benefit?
Well, I'm going to tell you since its formation in the 19 forties, the World Health Organization has been nothing more than a criminal cartel that has a soul and Singular intent. And I will show you the document that proves what I'm saying. This is not an allegation. This is actually provable by their own words in their own hand. And they use a 4 step process to execute cute every one of their nefarious plans.
They begin by planning an exercise, then they go to the business of funding that exercise, then they create the rationale for the thing that they're going to do and then they deploy and profit from it. And in violation of 15 US Code Section 19, which for those of you listening, coincidentally started with the Clayton Act In the same year that the World Health Organization in the United States, 1913, the same year the World Health Organization's progenitors also started. So I Find it fascinating that we passed the Clayton Act in 1913 and we set in motion a 110 years ago the criminal conspiracy which we now called the World Health Organization a 110 years later. And in violation of TFEU or TEFEU. I don't know even how to say it.
The TFEU, the treaty allegedly for the functioning of the European Union, which I think needs to now be called the Treaty for the Dysfunctional European cabal, article 101 unambiguously lays out the conditions that This was never a public health anything. It was racketeering for the purpose of instilling terror to adapt the behavior of a population. Period. That's what it was. That's what it always was.
And we can come up with every theoretical argument we wanna make about things. But the problem, even with the theory that we had an outbreak of something, is falsifiable for the data from Zurich that shows us that in the year of the death pandemic of the globe, life insurance companies paid $30,000,000,000 less in claims. Now if there's a medical professional or a social professional or anybody else who wants to debate that we could develop a virus cunningly that could find out your bank account, your insurance policy statements, and whether you're paid up on your premiums, that's a big ask. It turns out that the data is unambiguous. We did not have a pandemic, we had genocide, and we need to call call it what it is.
Next slide. When I say we planned it, let's make sure we understand Exactly the not so fine print of the fine print. And I want to call your attention first to the right Right hand column of the slide. This is the 2011 data that the World Health Organization, the Wellcome Trust, PATH, and the Gates Foundation did on their wonderful Worldwide program for a malaria vaccine for children under the age of 6 months of age. And in their clinical trial, it's helpful to point out that they murdered 66 children in the vaccine group And then cunningly used the term control for a control group in which they murdered 28 children.
Now the reason I said murdered and the reason why I use that term is because it's exactly what it was. Because it turns out that this Control group was not a saline injection. It was not some sort of innocuous innocent thing. It was actually a cocktail of for other known pathogenic disease carrying injections. The control group was known to kill people, And the experimental control group was actually theoretically maybe gonna kill people.
And what we did was we actually went ahead and murdered them all. And cunningly, under article 5, section 13, which I've put on this slide, I want you to understand why I said at its formation in 1947 when the WHO was funded and founded, it was funded been founded by people intent to commit a crime because of their own language. Section 13 of article 5 ends with the following statement, immunity from personal arrest or detention, blah blah blah, immunity from legal process of every kind. Now, if you didn't intend to commit a crime, why would you need to give yourself permanent and absolute immunity from every form of prosecution and its worst, even investigation for prosecution of every kind. People sit there and pretend, well, that's like diplomatic immunity.
Do you realize this isn't even meeting the standard of diplomatic immunity. This is a criminal organization who set in motion their own law to protect themselves against crimes they knew they were going to commit. And when I say they knew they were going to commit, I mean they knew it because their 1st director general, none other than doctor Rene Sand, who happened to be in the hospitality of the Germans in Dachau in 1940 earlier in 1947, mysteriously, with the largest of the Rockefeller Foundation, was nominated to become the 1st director general of The Who. And within 5 short years, Rene Dan decided to authorize the real purpose of the who in writing by then director general, doctor Brock Chisholm, who advocated for population control as its primary objective. Does that sound like public health to anyone in this room?
This is not public health. This is the advancement of The same genocidal program that began with the Carnegie Foundation's funding of the Eugenics office at Cold Spring Labs in the United States in 1913 under the philanthropy, philanthropy of Andrew Carnegie. People, stop Fooling yourself. We debate the leaves on the tree of what we call this pandemic thing, but we're not going to the root. This was an organized crime racketeering entity set up to give itself first absolute immunity and then execute its plans to make sure it controls who lives, who dies, and who gets any chance at life.
And if you think that I am somehow inflating numbers, let me be unambiguous. Under every treatment of tax provision, if I were to tell you that there is an 88% controlling interest of any organization, you might conclude that that risk that actually aggregates into a controlling interest. And It turns out that if we look at the foundation donations to the World Health Organization, 88% of those come from a single Organization, the Gates Foundation. That constitutes a violation of every competitiveness law in Europe and every competitive's law in the United States. This is absolutely not only not an independent Charitably funded donation, but more importantly, under the tax laws on both sides of the Atlantic, this constitutes directed Donations, which specifically are forbidden and do not have any place anywhere in the charter of the World Health Organization or any of the UN affiliated organizations.
When I say this is a crime, I mean it's a tax crime, a racketeering crime, a money laundering crime, and now the crime of racketeering leading to murder and global terrorism. Next slide. I told you that the second thing after they plan it is they fund it. And why don't we use the criminals' language in their own words? Because it's the best way to say it.
When they actually planned the release of the use of a biologically modified with the model derived from coronavirus, they actually said the following. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, We need to increase the public understanding for the needful medical countermeasures such as a pan influenza or pan coronavirus vaccine. Now let me pause for just one moment and remind you that the crisis that they were speaking of was a crisis of diminishing funding. There was no health crisis. This was a crisis of their coffers were starting to run dry.
That's the crisis. And let's read on. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.
That is officially the statement made by the conspiratorial cabal that by that time was the decade of vaccines put in motion in 2011 by the global preparedness monitoring board of the World Health Organization. And it was the funding base for Peter Daszak's partnership with the chimeric production of pathogens both in North Carolina and in Wuhan. So don't tell me that we have to do an investigation into where this came from, the criminals have admitted to it in their own words. Next slide. And now we get the fun one that no one in Congress is willing to address, which is the elephant in the room.
On October 21, 2000 And in 14, despite the multiple conversations between senator Rand Paul and Anthony Fauci where we've been told that Rand Paul has done everything he can to put on the ropes. He has had in his possession the letter that you see on the left. And it is the letter conveniently on NIAID letterhead Sent to the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, which unambiguously states that during the gain of function moratorium, which By the way, if we use the word moratorium, feels like that means you're supposed to stop. Why don't we go ahead and look at 2 pieces of this letter? First, the 2nd bullet under project 1, which by the way was not part of the original grant.
This was to look at the novel functions of the virus The genesis in vivo. You know what that means? In living systems. The grant was supposed to be clinical simulations and models. But this grant was modified with this letter to say we were going to authorize gain of function research during the moratorium in living systems.
And then we love the last paragraph of this letter, which conveniently says, as your grant is currently funded, this pause is voluntary. How many times have you met a voluntary moratorium? And the best part about it is that if we look at the very last line, or continue to conduct the applicable gain of function research until the end of the currently Active budget, period. But here comes the problem. You know who is supplying the budget?
An indefinite term, Limited amount contract from DARPA and from NIH. Isn't it convenient to have a perpetually funded project that needs to stop when the money runs out, when you find out that there is no point where the money runs out because there is no end to the thing that has no end. And lest you think that I'm making an allegation, which I'm not. I'm making an accusation. Let's be clear.
And there's a big difference. I'm not alleging anything. They actually went to the trouble of telling us that it was going to be the Wuhan virus that was gonna get us. As you see on The right hand side of the screen. Published in 2016, March 14, 2016, the SARS like Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus One, and I quote, is poised for human emergence.
Does that sound like we're just surprised that something in Wuhan went a little haywire in December of 2019, or does it feel like we were told, look at Wuhan and look at coronavirus and look at what we've been doing to manipulate coronavirus was in Wuhan and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And lo and behold, we're gonna go ahead and tell you that we're ready to release it in 2016. Next slide. We're almost done. And then they created it.
Now all of you know that I am criticized globally for my use of the term biological warfare. I do that because I am credentialed to do that. I happen to be, for the United States government, in the early part of 2000s, in the latter part of the nineties, a person who was sent around the world to look at the proliferation of biological and chemical weapons. I'm acutely familiar with the definition of what a biological warfare agent is in the 18 US code, the criminal code of violations of biological and chemical weapons. And so my assessment is, in fact, professional and right.
And the reason for That is I'm the one credentialed to make that determination for the United States government for many years. That's why I say it. But let's pretend for the moment that I'm just a nut job. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. So why don't we look at what the criminals said themselves, shall we?
In 2005, at a conference sponsored by DARPA and the MITRE Corporation. Ralph Baric, the architect of the lethal strand that has been injected into millions and billions of people's arms. That Ralph Baric was sponsored to present the following, and let's go ahead and use his words, presentation. Synthetic coronaviruses, biohacking, biowarfare enabling technologies. Does that sound like a public health distribution program?
Does that sound like something that is accidentally misinterpreted to mean something else? Or does biological warfare Enabling technologies sound like not countermeasures or pandemic preparedness. It sounds to me like biological warfare enabling technologies. And the reason why I have that hunch is what followed was he received, next to his NIAID grants, noncompetitive DARPA grants in matching funds for over $140,000,000 of aggregate funding going into his and his related programs on get funding going into his and his related programs on synthetic biological warfare enabling technologies. So do I have a Problem calling the injection a biological warfare enabling technology?
Absolutely not, because that's what they called it. And we know that they knew they called it that on September 18, 2019. Because on September 18th 2019, the racketeering, coke conspiring cabal of interlocking directorates, also known as The World Health Organization said that they were going to conduct an expert experience for the world that was going to be a rapidly spreading pandemic due to a lethal respiratory pathogen. The lethality in that statement is the problem. They didn't say we're gonna They didn't say we're gonna maybe get a little bit of sniffles going around.
They said we were going to actually have the promulgation of a deadly agent. And the stated reason, in September 2020, the progress indicator is that the cater, is that the world would accept a universal vaccine. Not, we'll look at other options of treatment. Not we'll have a look at what might be early intervention as doctor McCullough has so clearly advocated for in many, many, many instances. Not that, we stated on September 18, 2019, we were intending to kill.
And we were intending to kill to create the fear that would drive people to accept something that without coercion, no one would have accepted. And that's published by the Criminal Racketeers. Next slide. And there's only 2 to go if you're following. Deploy and profit from it.
We were told investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process. And lo and behold, guess what they saw? Profit at the end of the process. 2022, $100,000,000,000 for Pfizer of public funds. Moderna, after After lying to the congress in October of 2020 when they were asked to actually verify whether NIAID was promoting an injection that would enrich NIAID, where Anthony Fauci and the entire team at NIH said that they had no financial interest in their recommendation, they receive a back payment royalty of $400,000,000 for the first payment of the royalty.
$400,000,000, more than any Institute of Health has ever received in a single payment for a single invention in the history of American medical research. And lo and behold, what do we receive after that? A request from the World World Health Organization to expand its budget by 11% to make sure that the people who profited from it donate to it. And guess what they just did? They laundered the money right back.
That's what they did. Next, and now you get the final slide. This is not a public health crime. This is actually not a constitutional crime. This is a criminal Act done by a criminal institution established to enable criminal behavior since its foundation in 1947.
That is what this is. And we should not be debating the merits of democracy or liberty or anything else, as irrational as that would be if we stood at a bank robbery and debated The merits of printing dollar bills. The problem is not the dollar bills. It's the bank robber. And the problem here is not health, and it's not public health, and it's not the suppression of information and the suppression of dissident views, and the absolute unconscionable treatment of physicians around the world and academicians around the world who spoke out against this.
That's not the crime. The crime is that we had criminal racketeers who can spot conspired inspired and developed a, quote, emergency, the same criminal racketeers planned, manufactured, and did all agency to capture to make sure that you were told that you would use terms that they tell you to use, vaccine, face mask, health, social distancing, none of which had ordinary use definition, so we just used them. Criminal racketeers price Fixed with interlocking directorates where known competitors came together and fixed prices in direct collusion in violation of both European Union standards and in violation of both the Sherman and the Clayton Act in the United States. These were crimes. It was organized crime, and we should treat it as such.
Criminal racketeers publicly lied under oath, and this resulted in the death and destruction of liberty and, most importantly, the death and destruction of the integrity of well meaning people who sit here today doing they can within their power to try to treat the calamities created by this catastrophe. I will not, for a moment, denigrate the multiple contributions of amazing academic and medical professionals who've tried desperately to step into the gap and stop the corrupt outcomes of these crimes, but I will, without doubt, say the following. Until we treat this as a criminal conspiracy of criminal racketeers resulting in global terrorism for the purpose of profiteering and murder. Until we have that Conversation. We're having the wrong conversation because we are not here to debate the merits of a Modified agreement for a criminal racketeering organization.
We are here to end the criminal organization itself. This is my call to every single person on this planet. Don't just limit the power of the who. Destroy the who.
reSee.it AI Summary
The Federal Court of Appeal has prohibited public streaming of the Vaccine Travel Mandates hearing. Canadians impacted by these mandates must register to virtually attend the hearing. Justice Gagne declared the lawsuit moot, stating it would be a waste of resources. However, the remedies sought have not been received. The court's duty to address unconstitutional policies is questioned. The abuse of mootness in Canadian courts needs review. The appeal hearing is set for October 11th, 2023. Register to attend via Zoom. Download Justice Gagne's ruling here.
@ShaunRickard67 - Shaun Rickard
IMPORTANT UPDATES: As per the letter we received yesterday from Acting Chief Justice, Stratas with the Federal Court of Appeal, no public streaming of our Vaccine Travel Mandates hearing will be legally permitted. As a result anyone wishing to observe the proceedings live will need to register ASAP with the court and do so via Zoom (Link to register below). It is absolutely imperative that as many of the 6-7 million Canadians who's lives & livelihoods were negatively impacted by the heinous & tyrannical vaccine travel mandates register to virtually attend the hearing. Whether you can make it or not, please register anyway. IMPORTANT: Two of the primary rationales given by Justice Gagne for declaring our lawsuit moot last September are attached and can be seen below, but let me explain a little further. 1. [47] As a result, the Court is of the view that the judicial economy considerations outweigh the alleged important public interest and uncertainty in the law. = Justice Gagne felt that a public 5-day hearing would be a waste of court resources and that the financial costs would not be justified or warranted. 2. [49] There is no important public interest or inconsistency in the law that would justify allocating significant judicial resources to hear these moot Applications. = Justice Gagne felt that there would be no public interest in the case, and therefore it would be a waste of the court's time and resources. It's also incorrect to suggest that we have “substantially received the remedies sought” and this is highlighted by even a basic reading of our application notice. 6-7 million Canadians, deprived unconstitutionally of protected rights for nearly a year and subjected to discrimination, will be as offended as we are that this judge felt that their concerns were not worth the cost of a 5 day hearing in the Federal Court. How could this court consider that there was no inconsistency in law that would justify the hearing if it had already decided not to hear the case at all. Justice Gagne feels that it is not the role of the Court to prevent future government actions will be a surprise to the majority of Canadians who feel that the separation of powers in our country imposes upon our courts exactly that obligation where government policies are found to be unconstitutional, discriminatory and egregious. The first step towards meeting that solemn obligation is to actually hear the case, to listen to the concerns of those affected, and look at the issues rather than kick the can down the road! The issues here are no more moot than is the behavior of an abusive spouse who beats their partner for a year, and demands absolution for doing no more than temporarily stopping whilst threatening to start all over again some time in the future. The abuse of mootness in the Canadian courts clearly needs to be reviewed. Along with applicants in the other three cases we will press on with the appeal. We believe we will prevail. The road to justice can sometimes be a long one. Our mootness appeal hearing date is set for Wednesday October 11th, 2023 at 9.30am - Federal Court of Appeal, Ottawa, Ontario. Register here to attend this monumental hearing live via Zoom. By using this link it literally takes about 10-15 seconds: https://fca-caf.ca/en/pages/hearings/register/71?jsonString=%7B%22REGION_ID%22%3A5.0%2C%22REGION_ORDER%22%3A1.0%2C%22ENGLISH_REGION_NAME%22%3A%22Ontario%22%2C%22FRENCH_REGION_NAME%22%3A%22De%20l%27Ontario%22%2C%22CITY_ID%22%3A71.0%2C%22ENGLISH_CITY_NAME%22%3A%22Ottawa%22%2C%22CITY_FRENCH_NAME%22%3A%22Ottawa%22%2C%22CITY_ORDER%22%3A1.0%2C%22EVENT_GROUP_ID%22%3A151043.0%2C%22EVENT_GROUP_TYPE_ID%22%3A2.0%2C%22DIVISION_ID%22%3A2.0%2C%22SECTION_ID%22%3Anull%2C%22EVENT_ID%22%3A157003.0%2C%22PROCEEDING_SCHEDULE_ID%22%3A255375.0%2C%22COURT_NO%22%3A%22A-252-22%22%2C%22COURT_SEQ%22%3A2022100252.0%2C%22DOCNO%22%3Anull%2C%22NATURE_CD%22%3A%22E03%22%2C%22START_TIMESTAMP%22%3A%222023-10-11T09%3A30%3A00%22%2C%22START_DATE%22%3A%222023-10-11%22%2C%22DURATION%22%3Anull%2C%22END_TIMESTAMP%22%3A%222023-10-11T12%3A30%3A00%22%2C%22LANGUAGE%22%3A%22B%22%2C%22EVENT_TYPE_ID%22%3A3.0%2C%22EVENT_METHOD_ID%22%3A5.0%2C%22DISPLAY_EVENT_METHOD%22%3A%22%22%2C%22STATUS_TYPE_ID%22%3A9.0%2C%22STYLE_OF_CAUSE%22%3A%22SHAUN%20RICKARD%20ET%20AL%20v.%20ATTORNEY%20GENERAL%20OF%20CANADA%22%2C%22ENGLISH_LEGAL_CODE%22%3A%22APP%22%2C%22ENGLISH_CODE%22%3A%22%2FIP%22%2C%22ENGLISH_DESC%22%3Anull%2C%22HEARING_ENGLISH_DESC%22%3A%22Appeal%22%2C%22HEARING_FRENCH_DESC%22%3A%22Appel%22%2C%22NATURE_DESC_ENG%22%3A%22Appeal%20%28S.27%20-%20Final%29%20-%20By%20or%20Against%20the%20Crown%22%2C%22NATURE_DESC_FR%22%3A%22Appel%20%28Art.27%20-%20Finale%29%20-%20Par%20ou%20contre%20la%20couronne%22%2C%22DISPLAY_DURATION%22%3A%223h%22%2C%22PRCDG_TYPE%22%3A%22A%22%2C%22ENGLISH_PROCEEDING_TYPE%22%3A%22Federal%20Court%20of%20Appeal%22%2C%22FRENCH_PROCEEDING_TYPE%22%3A%22Cour%20d%27appel%20f%C3%A9d%C3%A9rale%22%2C%22PROCEEDING_CLASS_ID%22%3A0.0%2C%22ENGLISH_PROCEEDING_CLASS%22%3A%22Non-Action%22%2C%22FRENCH_PROCEEDING_CLASS%22%3A%22Non-Action%22%2C%22FILE_DT%22%3A%222022-11-18T00%3A00%3A00%22%2C%22FRENCH_LEGAL_CODE%22%3A%22APP%22%7D… Download a PDF copy of Justice Jocelyn Gagne’s full mootness ruling and rationale here: https://freedomandjustice.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/T-145-22-REASONS.pdf
