Category: World

Posted on

UNAIDS Releases Paper On “Human Rights-Based Approach” To Sexuality

The Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS, UNAIDS, recently caused a stir. This policy paper came out: “The International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) along with UNAIDS and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) officially launched a new set of expert jurist legal principles to guide the application of international human rights law to criminal law.”

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Topics include:

  • sexual and reproductive health and rights, including termination of pregnancy;
  • consensual sexual activities, including in contexts such as sex outside marriage, same-sex sexual relations, adolescent sexual activity and sex work;
  • gender identity and gender expression;
  • HIV non-disclosure, exposure or transmission;
  • drug use and the possession of drugs for personal use; and
  • homelessness and poverty.

As with most things, the devil’s in the details.

To address the obvious: this is not legally binding on anyone. It’s just a paper. Still, that doesn’t mean the contents won’t work their way into Federal or Provincial legislation at some point.

As part of the Who We Are section, UNAIDS describes itself as “leading the global effort to end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030 as part of the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Apparently, UNAIDS timed this document to coincide with International Women’s Day. That’s interesting, to say the least.

Anyhow, this UNAIDS document is called the: “8 March Principles for a Human Rights-Based Approach to Criminal Law Proscribing Conduct Associated with Sex, Reproduction, Drug Use, HIV, Homelessness and Poverty”. (See archive).

In fairness, there could be a lot of poor and imprecise wording throughout the document. But assuming that there’s not, it’s quite disturbing what’s been put out.

Parts I and II cover more general areas and ideas in law, and often seem quite reasonable. Having laws applied equally and fairly to all is something most people can easily get behind. But Part III is where things change.

Part III (page 20) of the document is where things really get weird. The following comments are an accurate reflection of what’s actually being written.

(Principle 14, page 21) addresses “sexual and reproductive health and rights”. Apparently no one should be held accountable for a mother drinking or doing drugs while pregnant. Non-disclosure of HIV (or presumably any disease) isn’t to be considered illegal.

Moreover, where a person’s criminal actions might result in criminal consequences, there’s to be no extra punishments based on the existence of the pregnancy. An example of this would be the homicide of a pregnant woman leading to multiple murder charges.

Are the unborn babies expected to have any rights here?

(Page 22) there’s a provision where “parents, guardians, carers, or other persons” who enable or assist children in exercising their sexual and/or reproductive rights may not be held criminally liable. Is this sort of thing to justify pedophilia and grooming?

(Principle 15, page 22) suggests that there should be laws against abortion in any capacity whatsoever. This applies both to the mother, and any third party.

(Principle 16, page 22) covers “consensual” sexual activity. While this is premised on the idea that all participants are in agreement, the wording suggests that it could be applied to adults and children.

Consensual sexual conduct, irrespective of the type of sexual activity, the sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression of the people involved or their marital status, may not be criminalized in any circumstances. Consensual same-sex, as well as consensual different-sex sexual relations, or consensual sexual relations with or between trans, non-binary and other gender-diverse people, or outside marriage – whether pre-marital or extramarital – may, therefore, never be criminalized.

With respect to the enforcement of criminal law, any prescribed minimum age of consent to sex must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner. Enforcement may not be linked to the sex/gender of participants or age of consent to marriage.

Moreover, sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this context, the enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them. Pursuant to their evolving capacities and progressive autonomy, persons under 18 years of age should participate in decisions affecting them, with due regard to their age, maturity

The prescribed minimum age of consent to sex must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner? What does that even mean? Is it discrimination if an adult is not allowed to be with a child?

The paper also states that minors should be participating in decisions that impact them, taking their age and maturity into account. Is this an attempt to turn a prohibited practice into more of a “grey area”?

As for “age of consent to marriage”, is that a reference to child brides?

There’s the issue of not criminalizing activity involving members of the alphabet soup. Just a thought, but since it’s okay to not disclose HIV status, would it also be okay to deceive a partner about their true identity?

(Principle 17, page 23) calls for the complete decriminalization of sex work — such as prostitution, or pornography — as long as it’s done without coercion or fraud. To their credit, it’s specified to be limited to adults.

(Principle 18, page 23) says that sexual orientation or gender identity should not be criminalized, but doesn’t define either term in a meaningful way.

Beyond that, there’s to be no penalty for “exploration, free development and/or affirmation of sexual orientation or gender identity”, unless coercion is involved. This leaves open the possibility of people just larping as the opposite sex, and who don’t have gender dysphoria.

It also doesn’t address the growing issue of using gender identity as a means to attack single-sex spaces, such as prisons, changerooms and most sports.

The document further criticizes any efforts or attempts to engage in conversion therapy.

(Principle 19, page 24) implies that it’s fine to not disclose HIV positive status to a partner, as long as there’s no deliberate attempt to spread it. Presumably, this wouldn’t just apply to HIV.

(Principle 20, page 24) effectively calls for the decriminalization of all drugs for personal use, including by minors and pregnant women. Part (b) could be interpreted to mean the possession or distribution or drug paraphernalia shouldn’t be criminalized either.

The document also promotes what could be considered safe injection sites.

(Principle 21, page 24) would end vagrancy and squatting laws, if done for life-sustaining reasons. While this is all understandable, it’s unclear what will happen with property owners. All said, this section is probably the most reasonable one, as it’s not an issue of immorality.

Now, just because the United Nations releases a document, that doesn’t mean it will become law. However, content from “non-binding” papers often do trickle into domestic politics.

(1) https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/presscentre/featurestories/2023/march/20230308_new-legal-principles-decriminalization
(2) https://www.unaids.org/en/whoweare/about
(3) https://icj2.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/8-MARCH-Principles-FINAL-printer-version-1-MARCH-2023.pdf
(4) UNAIDS March Principles On Criminal Law Sexual Behaviours

Posted on

Digital Citizen Contribution Program & The Paris Call

It’s no secret that very little (if anything) the Canadian Government does actually originates organically from within this country. Typically, some international body or N.G.O. is responsible for setting it in motion. And efforts to combat misinformation online are no exception.

Activities like the Digital Citizen Initiative and Digital Citizen Contribution Program understandably raise questions. In a free and open society, should the Government be attempting to influence and manipulate public opinion on important topics? Why are we paying for this? And does this sort of thing end up doing an end run around democracy? (Not that we really have one)

Is advancing international cyber norms something Ottawa should be involved with? (See original)

All of that said, a more basic question needs to be asked:

Who’s really behind it?

Turns out that this stems from a 2018 agreement that received little coverage in the mainstream press. Here is how it’s explained on the Paris Call website.

In 2018, French President Emmanuel Macron launched the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace with the goal of addressing new cyberspace threats that could endanger citizens and infrastructure. The Paris Call invites all cyberspace actors to work together and encourages states to cooperate internationally with private sector partners, the world of research, and civil society organizations.

Supporters of the Paris Call commit to working together to adopt responsible behaviour and secure cyberspace, based on a set of nine common principles. These principles act as a non-binding declaration and set a precedent as the largest-ever multi-stakeholder cybersecurity agreement in modern history.

Today, over 95 governments, nearly 350 international organizations, as well as more than 600 private sector entities have endorsed the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly pledged Canada’s support for the Paris Call in November 2018.

The media grants to “safeguard democracy” are somewhat known in media and political circles. But what isn’t discussed is the international agreement done to make this happen.

Now, were any referendums or election campaigns ever held on joining some initiative like this? No. And it raises the question of who exactly will be setting the standards, enforcing the standards, and what kind of private information that will be shared.

Of course, Microsoft is involved in this project, because, why not?

As with all (or at least, most) agreements, this is considered non-binding. However, Government treats it as if it were a legitimate obligation. Now, what are the ideas behind this?

9 Principles of the Paris Call:

  • Protect individuals and infrastructure
  • Protect the Internet
  • Defend electoral processes
  • Defend intellectual property
  • Non-proliferation
  • Lifecycle security & supply chain security
  • Cyber hygiene
  • No private hack back
  • International Norms

On their own, these principles seem harmless, and in fact beneficial. But with all things, the details of how it would be implemented are worth looking at.

The Paris Call is supported by some 400 N.G.O.s and 700 private corporations, at least, according to recent updates on the site. That of course raises the question of who’s just there in a symbolic capacity, and who was actually involved in drafting these documents. They emphasize multi-stakeholder participation at the U.N., without really specifying.

Here, the Government uses taxpayer money to “combat harmful disinformation“. Now, it doesn’t (yet) call for the banning of certain viewpoints, but it does mean subsidizing and financing favourable ones.

This has led to the Digital Democracy Project and the “Media Literacy Week“, among other initiatives. The Federal Government is using taxpayer money to domestically implement an international agreement for cyberspace security.

The Digital Citizen Contribution Program was an initiative to hand out fairly large sums of money to “media influencers” that could potentially sway public opinion on a number of different topics.

The amounts and recipients of earlier grants were previously covered here. That addressed the DCCP, but was not exhaustive of these programs.

This seems like rebranded efforts such as Internet Governance Forum and the Digital Cooperation. Both of which were heavily influenced by the United Nations.

Special Ukraine Crisis Call
In the light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this special call is aimed to address the growing spread of harmful misinformation and disinformation. The special targeted call was launched to fund initiatives that help people identify misinformation and disinformation online.

Yes, the Feds actually had a program to contract out influential people that could manipulate public opinion on the Ukraine-Russia situation. Is war propaganda ethical at all?

It’s not a stretch to see politicians go to the next level, and start banning or restricting viewpoints that contradict official narratives. It’s been talked out before.

One final point: let’s not pretend that this is limited to Trudeau or the Liberals. Had Stephen Harper been re-elected in 2015, he surely would have signed onto it.

(1) https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/online-disinformation/digital-citizen-contribution-program.html
(2) https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/news/2022/03/government-of-canada-reinforces-support-to-organizations-to-help-counter-harmful-disinformation.html
(3) https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/news/2020/05/paris-call-trust-and-security-in-cyberspace.html
(4) https://pariscall.international/en/
(5) https://pariscall.international/en/principles
(6) https://pariscall.international/assets/files/10-11-WG3-Multistakeholder-participation-at-the-UN-The-need-for-greater-inclusivity-in-the-UN-dialogues-on-cybersecurity.pdf
(7) https://pariscall.international/assets/files/WG4-Final-Report-101121.pdf
(8) Paris Call Advancing International Norms
(9) Paris Call Text

Posted on

Some Thoughts On The Virus/No-Virus Challenges Going On

This brief piece was inspired by a recent article that was forwarded here. Many are not aware of a growing divide within the larger movement of freedom supporters. Broadly speaking these can be classified as two factions:

(1) Those who are opposed to various medical martial law measures, including lockdowns, business closures, curfews, vaccine passports, masks, and other intrusions, but who otherwise support the concepts of viruses and vaccines; and

(2) Those who think that this virus — and viruses more broadly — are a work of fiction to push various social and political agendas.

Yes, there has been the argument that all of this is pointless, and distracts from the larger picture. However, it could also be said that demonstrating there’s no way to properly isolate a virus would by default render all freedom restrictions unnecessary.

This isn’t, of course, to suggest that everyone who believes in viruses (or a specific one) is a fraud or a shill. Many good people do.

That being said, the implications are huge if the second group turns out to be correct. Much of modern medicine would collapse if it was shown to be founded on false pretenses. Anyhow:

Without getting too much into the nitty gritty, tensions seem to be rising over efforts to debunk virology, and germ theory as a whole.

One of the more interesting items is “flaw #22” on the page, specifically the asymmetric burden of proof.

Asymmetrical burden of proof. Among other things, the bar for “proof” that they set for themselves is unreasonably low, while the bar that they set for everyone else is unreasonably high. And it appears that the only judges whom they will be willing to accept are themselves.

There’s more of course, but this is worth addressing. The argument seems to be that a thesis can only be debunked if a stronger and more credible one can take it’s place. That not how things work. Consider these examples:

  • In criminal court, a judge or jury never actually rules a defendant to be innocent. Either the prosecution has sufficiently proven culpability (guilty), or they they haven’t (not guilty). There’s no requirement for a defendant to prove someone else committed a crime, though it would certainly be beneficial.
  • When inspecting an automobile, it’s not really proven to be safe. Instead, the mechanic or other person searches for common sources of damage, or defective operation. If nothing is found, then the result comes back okay.
  • University students have likely seen hypothesis testing in statistics. The goal isn’t to prove what the mean or variance is, but rather to debunk the assumption. The methods may prove your belief (reject the asserted mean or variance), or there may be insufficient proof (fail to reject). That said, there’s no demand to provide alternative answers

In the linked article, Steve Kirsch laments there is a double standard. People wishing to argue the existence of a specific virus, or viruses in general, must provide concrete proof. However, someone who wants to debunk that only need to find sufficient errors, not formulate a better answer.

Common criticisms for virus isolation include: improper (or no) controls, lack of replicability, and adding things like monkey kidney cells or fetal bovine tissue.

A favourite on this site is the screwy definition of a “Covid death”, which stands any sense of honesty and integrity on its head. The rampant pharma connections are also difficult to ignore. Sometimes, it’s not science, but common sense that should cause people to second guess.

Yes, there is a double standard when it comes to the evidence required for “prove v.s. debunk”. And that’s quite okay.

(1) https://stevekirsch.substack.com/
(2) https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/sam-baileys-very-disingenuous-settling
(3) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/a-death-resulting-from-a-clinically-compatible-illness/

Posted on

Holomodor 2.0 Coming, Or All Just A Coincidence?

Thanks to the people who have been compiling this data. A recent version is available from the Gateway Pundit. Seems odd that so many “independent” events have happened lately, threatening the food supply of the West. Could there be more to it?

Note: the leg work wasn’t done here.

Holodomor is of course a reference to the starvation of Ukrainians in 1932/1933. This is widely believed to have been orchestrated by Stalin, in an effort to put down an independence movement.

Of course, by phasing out meats, and subsiding the mass production of insects, it seems like our rulers have other plans.

  1. 1/11/21 A fire that destroyed 75,000-square-foot processing plant in Fayetteville
  2. 4/30/21 A fire ignited inside the Smithfield Foods pork processing plant in Monmouth, IL
  3. 7/25/21 Three-alarm fire at Kellogg plant in Memphis, 170 emergency personnel responded to the call
  4. 7/30/21 Firefighters on Friday battled a large fire at Tyson’s River Valley Ingredients plant in Hanceville, Alabama
  5. 8/23/21 Fire crews were called to the Patak Meat Production company on Ewing Road in Austell
  6. 9/13/21 A fire at the JBS beef plant in Grand Island, Neb., on Sunday night forced a halt to slaughter and fabrication lines
  7. 10/13/21 A five-alarm fire ripped through the Darigold butter production plant in Caldwell, ID
  8. 11/15/21 A woman is in custody following a fire at the Garrard County Food Pantry
  9. 11/29/21 A fire broke out around 5:30 p.m. at the Maid-Rite Steak Company meat processing plant
  10. 12/13/21 West Side food processing plant in San Antonio left with smoke damage after a fire
  11. 1/7/22 Damage to a poultry processing plant on Hamilton’s Mountain following an overnight fire
  12. 1/13/22 Firefighters worked for 12 hours to put a fire out at the Cargill-Nutrena plant in Lecompte, LA
  13. 1/31/22 a fertilizer plant with 600 tons of ammonium nitrate inside caught on fire on Cherry Street in Winston-Salem
  14. 2/3/22 A massive fire swept through Wisconsin River Meats in Mauston
  15. 2/3/22 At least 130 cows were killed in a fire at Percy Farm in Stowe
  16. 2/15/22 Bonanza Meat Company goes up in flames in El Paso, Texas
  17. 2/15/22 Nearly a week after the fire destroyed most of the Shearer’s Foods plant in Hermiston
  18. 2/16/22 A fire had broken at US largest soybean processing and biodiesel plant in Claypool, Indiana
  19. 2/18/22 An early morning fire tore through the milk parlor at Bess View Farm
  20. 2/19/22 Three people were injured, and one was hospitalized, after an ammonia leak at Lincoln Premium Poultry in Fremont
  21. 2/22/22 The Shearer’s Foods plant in Hermiston caught fire after a propane boiler exploded
  22. 2/28/22 A smoldering pile of sulfur quickly became a raging chemical fire at Nutrien Ag Solutions
  23. 2/28/22 A man was hurt after a fire broke out at the Shadow Brook Farm and Dutch Girl Creamery
  24. 3/4/22 294,800 chickens destroyed at farm in Stoddard, Missouri
  25. 3/4/22 644,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, Maryland
  26. 3/8/22 243,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in New Castle, Delaware
  27. 3/10/22 663,400 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, MD
  28. 3/10/22 915,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Taylor, IA
  29. 3/14/22 The blaze at 244 Meadow Drive was discovered shortly after 5 p.m. by farm owner Wayne Hoover
  30. 3/14/22 2,750,700 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Jefferson, Wisconsin
  31. 3/16/22 A fire at a Walmart warehouse distribution center in Plainfield, Indiana has cast a large plume of smoke visible throughout Indianapolis.
  32. 3/16/22 Nestle Food Plant extensively damaged in fire and new production destroyed Jonesboro, Arkansas
  33. 3/17/22 5,347,500 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Buena Vista, Iowa
  34. 3/17/22 147,600 chickens destroyed at farm in Kent, Delaware
  35. 3/18/22 315,400 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, Maryland
  36. 3/22/22 172,000 Turkeys destroyed on farms in South Dakota
  37. 3/22/22 570,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Butler, Nebraska
  38. 3/24/22 Fire fighters from numerous towns are battling a major fire at the McCrum potato processing facility in Belfast, Maine.
  39. 3/24/22 418,500 chickens destroyed at farm in Butler, Nebraska
  40. 3/25/22 250,300 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Franklin, Iowa
  41. 3/26/22 311,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  42. 3/27/22 126,300 Turkeys destroyed in South Dakota
  43. 3/28/22 1,460,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Guthrie, Iowa
  44. 3/29/22 A massive fire burned 40,000 pounds of food meant to feed people in a food desert near Maricopa
  45. 3/31/22 A structure fire caused significant damage to a large portion of key fresh onion packing facilities in south Texas
  46. 3/31/22 76,400 Turkeys destroyed in Osceola, Iowa
  47. 3/31/22 5,011,700 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Osceola, Iowa
  48. 4/6/22 281,600 chickens destroyed at farm in Wayne, North Carolina
  49. 4/9/22 76,400 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  50. 4/9/22 208,900 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  51. 4/12/22 89,700 chickens destroyed at farm in Wayne, North Carolina
  52. 4/12/22 1,746,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Dixon, Nebraska
  53. 4/12/22 259,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Minnesota
  54. 4/13/22 Fire destroys East Conway Beef & Pork Meat Market in Conway, New Hampshire
  55. 4/13/22 Plane crashes into Gem State Processing, Idaho potato and food processing plant
  56. 4/13/22 77,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  57. 4/14/22 Taylor Farms Food Processing plant burns down Salinas, California.
  58. 4/14/22 99,600 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  59. 4/15/22 1,380,500 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Lancaster, Minnesota
  60. 4/19/22 Azure Standard nation’s premier independent distributor of organic and healthy food, was destroyed by fire in Dufur, Oregon
  61. 4/19/22 339,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  62. 4/19/22 58,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Montrose, Color
  63. 4/20/22 2,000,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Minnesota
  64. 4/21/22 A small plane crashed in the lot of a General Mills plant in Covington, Georgia
  65. 4/22/22 197,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  66. 4/23/22 200,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
  67. 4/25/22 1,501,200 chickens destroyed at egg farm Cache, Utah
  68. 4/26/22 307,400 chickens destroyed at farm Lancaster Pennsylvania
  69. 4/27/22 2,118,000 chickens destroyed at farm Knox, Nebraska
  70. 4/28/22 Egg-laying facility in Iowa kills 5.3 million chickens, fires 200-plus workers
  71. 4/28/22 Allen Harim Foods processing plant killed nearly 2M chickens in Delaware
  72. 4/2822 110,700 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
  73. 4/29/22 5 million honeybees are dead after a flight carrying the pollinator insects from California to Alaska got diverted to Georgia (New)
  74. 4/29/22 1,366,200 chickens destroyed at farm Weld Colorado
  75. 4/30/22 13,800 chickens destroyed at farm Sequoia Oklahoma
  76. 5/3/22 58,000 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
  77. 5/3/22 118,900 Turkeys destroyed Beadle S Dakota
  78. 5/3/22 114,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  79. 5/3/22 118,900 Turkeys destroyed Lyon Minnesota
  80. 5/7/22 20,100 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
  81. 5/10/22 72,300 chickens destroyed at farm Lancaster Pennsylvania
  82. 5/10/22 61,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  83. 5/10/22 35,100 Turkeys destroyed Muskegon, Michigan
  84. 5/13/22 10,500 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
  85. 5/14/22 83,400 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  86. 5/17/22 79,00 chickens destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  87. 5/18/22 7,200 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  88. 5/19/22 Train carrying limestone derailed Jensen Beach FL
  89. 5/21/22 57,000 Turkeys destroyed on farm in Dakota Minnesota
  90. 5/23/22 4,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  91. 5/29/22 A Saturday night fire destroyed a poultry building at Forsman Farms in Howard Lake, Minnesota
  92. 5/31/22 3,000,000 chickens destroyed by fire at Forsman facility in Stockholm Township, Minnesota
  93. 6/2/22 30,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
  94. 6/7/22 A fire occurred Tuesday evening at the JBS meat packing plant in Green Bay, Wisconsin
  95. 6/8/22 Firefighters from Tangipahoa Fire District 1 respond to a fire at the Purina Feed Mill in Arcola, Louisiana
  96. 6/9/22 Irrigation water was canceled in California (the #1 producer of food in the US) and storage water flushed directly out to the delta.
  97. 6/12/22 Largest Pork Company in the US Shuts Down California Plant Due to High Costs
  98. 6/13/22 Fire Breaks Out at a Food Processing Plant West of Waupaca County in Wisconsin
  99. 6/14/22 Over 10,000 head of cattle have reportedly died in the recent Kansas heat wave (New)

Thanks as well for Lioness of Judah for covering this too. An interesting comment from that post reads:

“Regarding the destruction of processing plants, it would be more impactful if we could see insurance data about how many have been destroyed compared previous years. Just like an sudden increase in 2021 all-cause mortality is very disturbing and indisputable, we need to see a percentage of destroyed plants as compared to a typical year. That data has to be tracked by some insurance companies, right?”

Yes, it would definitely be interesting to see the overall insurance data, as many people have done such things over the years for financial gain.

That being said, this appears on the surface to be a bit too common lately.

Posted on

U.N. Death Cult: 73 Million Abortions Annually Worldwide

The World Health Organization openly posts and discusses some pretty disturbing and messed up data on abortion worldwide. (See archive).

This expands on a recent Canuck Law article, which estimates that there have been over 4.2 million abortions just in Canada since 1970. This averages out to approximately 20% of pregnancies being willfully terminated. Few are aware of just how big this problem is.

Here are some claims W.H.O. promotes:

  • Abortion is a common health intervention. It is safe when carried out using a method recommended by WHO, appropriate to the pregnancy duration and by someone with the necessary skills.
  • Six out of 10 of all unintended pregnancies end in an induced abortion.
  • Around 45% of all abortions are unsafe, of which 97% take place in developing countries.
  • Unsafe abortion is a leading – but preventable – cause of maternal deaths and morbidities. It can lead to physical and mental health complications and social and financial burdens for women, communities and health systems.
  • Lack of access to safe, timely, affordable and respectful abortion care is a critical public health and human rights issue.

And this one is a doozy:

Around 73 million induced abortions take place worldwide each year. Six out of 10 (61%) of all unintended pregnancies, and 3 out of 10 (29%) of all pregnancies, end in induced abortion

This claim is based on work from Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller A-B, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C et al, which covered estimates from the years 1990 through 2019. They used a “Bayesian framework”, meaning dta on pregnancy intentions and abortion were compiled from country-based surveys, official statistics, and published studies found through a literature search. So, it’s not just a straight compilation, but estimates as well.

Of course, if this figure of 73 million, per year, is even remotely accurate, it would be somewhere between 2 and 5 billion children have been aborted since the 1970s, when the movement really took off.

Restrictive abortion regulation can cause distress and stigma, and risk constituting a violation of human rights of women and girls, including the right to privacy and the right to non-discrimination and equality, while also imposing financial burdens on women and girls. Regulations that force women to travel to attain legal care, or require mandatory counselling or waiting periods, lead to loss of income and other financial costs, and can make abortion inaccessible to women with low resources.

Estimates from 2006 show that complications of unsafe abortions cost health systems in developing countries US$ 553 million per year for post-abortion treatments. In addition, households experienced US$ 922 million in loss of income due to long-term disability related to unsafe abortion. Countries and health systems could make substantial monetary savings by providing greater access to modern contraception and quality induced abortion.

A set of scoping reviews from 2021 indicate that abortion regulations – by being linked to fertility – affect women’s education, participation on the labour market and positive contribution to GDP growth. The legal status of abortion can also affect children’s educational outcomes, and their earnings on the labour market later in life. For example, legalization of abortion – by reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus increasing the likelihood that children are born wanted – can be linked to greater parental investments in children, including in girls’ schooling.

Does W.H.O. condemn the hundreds of millions — if not billions — of lives that are lost through this? Not exactly. The rights of the unborn never seem to factor into the equation.

W.H.O. attempts to make several economic arguments as to why abortion should be legal and as accessible as possible. Of course, they don’t seem to bother with addressing the long term physical and psychological impacts of women who do abort their children.

The World Health Organization also has its own division on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH). (See archive). It’s funded both by various governments and private companies, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (See archive). They always seem to be around whenever there are population reduction programs involved.

5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences

Enshrining abortion is also written right into Agenda 2030, which was signed by “Conservative” Stephen Harper in 2015. (See archive). It’s item #5.6 on the Treaty.

One might think it strange that population control groups are interested in keeping abortion legal and readily available. Then again, once one realizes the scale of this mass infanticide, things start to make a whole lot more sense.

Furthermore, the W.H.O. and U.N. link to the U.N. Population Fund, their 2014 Programme of Action, and to the Beijing Declaration And Platform For Action. (See archive). In a sick twist, abortion is promoted as women’s rights, and pregnancy an often unwanted evil.

Of course, 50% or so of the babies who are killed would have grown up to become women. This is something that many women’s rights groups don’t get, or at least pretend they don’t.

It’s interesting that groups like the United Nations claim to be against child exploitation and human trafficking. That said, they support encourage practices that ensure the deaths of countless unborn, while their remains can be sold off for a variety of purposes.

It’s even more disturbing that the U.N. keeps detailed and up-to-date records of abortion regulations across countries. Guess it’s one way of tracking where the most victims are likely to come from.

Has abortion been stopped, or slowed over the last 2 1/2 years during this so-called pandemic? Not at all. In fact, it’s one of the few things that were still available in Canada the entire time. Sure, weddings, churches, and funerals were “non-essential”. However, abortion, weed and liquor were still accessible.

SOURCE MATERIAL
(1) https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/eugenics-in-canada-20-of-babies-aborted-in-pro-choice-movement/
(3) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32710833/
(4) https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research-(srh)/human-reproduction-programme
(5) https://archive.ph/uyd8J
(6) https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research-(srh)/human-reproduction-programme/donors
(7) https://archive.ph/7tb5Q
(8) https://www.un.org/ohrlls/sites/www.un.org.ohrlls/files/2030_agenda_for_sustainable_development_web.pdf
(9) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development web
(10) https://www.unfpa.org/publications/international-conference-population-and-development-programme-action
(11) https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/CSW/PFA_E_Final_WEB.pdf
(12) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/UN-Beijing-Declaration-And-Platform-For-Action.pdf
(13) https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/related-health-issues
(14) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331561/WHO-2019-nCoV-essential_health_services-2020.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(15) WHO-2019-nCoV Essential Health Services 2020 March 2020
(16) WHO-2019-nCoV-essential_health_services June 2020
(17) https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/policy/AbortionPoliciesReproductiveHealth.pdf

Posted on

Taking That Last Step To See Through The Lies….

Credit for the artwork goes to Bill Huston, and please visit his website. Also, this confrontation with Andrew Kaufman and Judy Mikovits is very much worth the watch. The full livestream is available online and mirrored for anyone wanting it.

Plenty of decent people across the world are fully aware that their freedoms have been crushed in a planned and deliberate manner since 2020. They see that these “conspiracy theories” of using a so-called pandemic to implement societal control turned out to be accurate. Kudos to them for that.

But, there’s one step many won’t take: admit there’s no virus.

Why does this last step matter? Because it’s the pipeline to realizing how deep the pharma rabbit hole goes. If there’s no “Covid-19”, then it means all of the testing equipment is completely faulty and invalid. Moreover, all of the other “viruses” discovered over the years would be immediately suspect. If no viruses have ever been proven to exist, then virology — and germ theory itself — come crashing down. In order to preserve the medical industry, then this lie needs to be protected at all costs.

Why are theories of lab leak and/or bioweapon promoted? Because they attempt to explain the origins of this “virus”, rather than look into whether it’s even real.

How is a “case” defined, according to the World Health Organization? (See archive).

Notwithstanding how vague “suspected” and “probable” cases are, the definitions for so-called confirmed cases are equally dubious.

  1. A person with a positive Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT)
  2. A person with a positive SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-RDT AND meeting either the probable case definition or suspect criteria A OR B
  3. An asymptomatic person with a positive SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-RDT who is a contact of a probable or confirmed case.

NAAT testing doesn’t prove anything, which will be addressed later. Also, everyone, including the WHO, admits these tests aren’t reliable.

Not only is there the issue of no isolation, WHO recommends in its March 2020 (see page 3), and September 2020 (see page 8), guidance NOT to isolate for routine testing.

Perhaps WHO just doesn’t want proper testing done normally to save money?! Well, not really, their own paperwork (see archive) indicates that they view testing for just a gene to be sufficient.

If no virus has even been isolated or shown to exist, then what have doctors been prescribing over the years? Are they morons, or just being paid off?

Admittedly, it wasn’t really a topic addressed here for quite a while. However, the time has long come for hitting this home. And what is the definition of a “Covid death”? According to the World Health Organization, it is:

2. DEFINITION FOR DEATHS DUE TO COVID-19
A death due to COVID-19 is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID disease (e.g. trauma). There should be no period of complete recovery from COVID-19 between illness and death.
.
A death due to COVID-19 may not be attributed to another disease (e.g. cancer) and should be counted independently of preexisting conditions that are suspected of triggering a severe course of COVID-19.

Unfortunately, this isn’t satire. The WHO actually provides this incredibly vague and meaningless definition. Only a complicit and deliberately obtuse media wouldn’t expose this. (See archive), as the original has either been deleted or moved.

The BC Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC), admitted in April 2020 that these tests can’t actually determine active infection. (See original). Also, the 30% error rate is apparently just a commonly quoted statistic, not the result of real research.

There was an article in June 2020 (now deleted), where BCPHO Bonnie Henry warned against mass testing, as false positives could overburden hospitals. See archives here and here.

To repeat: considering that there is no virus isolation, and these tests aren’t designed for infection anyway, what exactly is being tested for?

  • Why is this virus pushed, despite lack of proof it exists?
  • Why have other viruses been pushed, despite lack of proof they exist?
  • Why does WHO recommend against isolation in regular testing?
  • Why does WHO see testing for a gene as sufficient?
  • Why is the definition of “Covid death” so convoluted?
  • Why does Bonnie Henry admit false positives could flood hospitals?
  • Why does the BCCDC admit these tests can’t determine infection?

These are just a few of the core problems.

There’s also all kinds of proof that this was planned in advance. And people should wonder about connections like the Rockefeller Foundation to the University of Toronto.

Of course, this isn’t to say that everyone who still believes in germ theory or viruses is a grifter or shill. Plenty of well meaning people are still caught up in that. They RIGHTLY recognize martial law being imposed, but can’t bring themselves to admit that it’s all been a lie.

Many accept that 90-95% of this is a lie, but can’t come to that last part.

That being said, there are still some basic questions that need answering.

Simply saying: “I oppose masks, vaccine passports and lockdowns” is a safe position to take. It doesn’t address the depth of the hoax.

And if you haven’t checked out the work from Fluoride Free Peel, go do that. This deadly “virus” hasn’t been isolated or proven to exist, anywhere in the world. Additionally, it doesn’t appear that any others have been either. There’s also a pretty interesting set of Google docs available from A Warrior Calls, worth checking out.

(1) https://www.bitchute.com/video/qm1z7PhGXnGe/
(2) https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Surveillance_Case_Definition-2020.2
(3) WHO-2019-nCoV-Surv_Case_Definition-2020.
(4) https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf
(5) https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf
(6) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/WHO-Guidelines-Classification-Of-Death.pdf
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/WHO-COVID-19-laboratory-Testing-March-17-2020.pdf
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/WHO-2019-nCoV-laboratory-September-11-2020-Guidelines.pdf
(9) https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/protocol-v2-1.pdf
(10) Diagnostic detection of 2019-nCoV by real-time RT-PCR
(11) https://www.bitchute.com/video/iKXqxr8RgNQz/
(12) https://odysee.com/@CanuckLaw:8/Definitions-Matter:d
(13) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/BC-COVID19_InterpretingTesting_Results_NAT_PCR.pdf
(14) http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Professionals-Site/Documents/COVID19_InterpretingTesting_Results_NAT_PCR.pdf
(15) https://www.glaciermedia.ca/bc-news/bonnie-henry-warns-businesses-against-covid-testing-4682197
(16) https://archive.ph/U2k6g
(17) Wayback Machine
(18) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/
(19) https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1BZ7kHlWeg5pcvLMFvC-Hao8pIc4hiM-o
(20) https://www.youtube.com/c/BillHustonPodcast
(21) https://www.chancellorscircle.utoronto.ca/members/the-rockefeller-foundation/