Category: Subversion

Posted on

Recycling Used “Covid” Masks Apparently A Thing Now

If you (or your children) go to college or university, you’ll undoubtedly remember that there were mask mandates until very recently. Of course, there are many places that still have them to this day. The justification was that there was some deadly virus, and that the masks — and vaccine passports — were necessary.

Notwithstanding the fact that “Covid-19” doesn’t exist, and that germ theory is pretty much based on lies, one would think that schools would be taking this seriously. After all, shouldn’t there be biohazardous containers everywhere to dispose of used masks?

Not only is that not the case, but it seems that recycling masks is also a fairly common thing. Not sure how exactly this works, but wouldn’t that endanger everyone?

This isn’t an attempt to justify endless waste. However, any adult capable of rational thought should be asking why this is being done. After all, this (alleged) virus is (allegedly) what caused the biggest economic crash in generations. Why pinch pennies just to recycle biohazardous waste?

For anyone curious, check the college in your area to see if they have these bins.

It’s almost as if there’s no virus at all.

Posted on

Colleges/Universities: Heavily Subsidized Charities, Playing Along With Mask, Vaccine Orders

Yes, these numbers are higher than the amounts of colleges and universities in Canada. However, many of them have more than one registered charity operating under their name. It also includes some student unions, religious sects, and graduate student groups.

Visit this earlier piece for some of the grant money received on behalf of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This isn’t difficult to find.

If the audio sounds a bit off in the video, it had to be compressed in order to be uploaded to this site. The original is available here.

While the video is by no means exhaustive, there were some key takeaways:

  • College and universities are registered charities with the C.R.A.
  • They’re eligible for rent subsidies, CERS, from their status as charities
  • The schools (or at least some groups within) have received CEWS, the wage subsidy
  • They take money from private donors, which includes pharmaceutical pushers
  • Canadian taxpayers forced to subsidize FOREIGN universities through C.R.A.

Although not in this video, it’s worth mentioning that universities regularly receive large grants from groups like CIHR, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research. For many professors, this funding is essential to do research. Are they really going to debunk their Government masters? Of course, that’s a major topic that deserves its own piece.

Of course, NSERC (Natural Sciences & Engineering Research Council), and SSHRC (Social Studies & Humanities Research Council), distribute money to other parts of universities. It’s fair to assume that these schools are well aware of the outcomes that are expected.

What is the result of this? There are significant financial interests in having post secondary institutions play along with the “pandemic” narrative. Consequently, there has been no real opposition to imposing masks and vaccine passports in the schools.

Also consider that virtually all schools have nursing and other health programs. Many universities have medical schools. There’s too much tied up in the status quo to pose a genuine threat.

Vital questions are not asked as a result of these policies. Issues such as no virus ever being isolated, (see Fluoride Free Peel’s work) should be front and center in this discussion. But they aren’t.

Another important question is how the World Health Organization defines a “Covid death”. The result would be funny, if not for the real world consequences.

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. (See archive here). It’s been covered elsewhere on this site, and is worth bringing up again.

These are just a few of the basic questions that colleges and universities should be having their students think about. After all, they pitch themselves as institutions of higher learning. Instead, they serve to promote the status quo.

Come to think of it: plenty of schools offer some kind of media or journalism program. However, the “next generation” of journalists and reporters don’t seem interested in doing real research. Sadly, that’s not too surprising anymore.

This continues the list of institutions that are getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, trucking associations, chambers of commerce, financial institutions, the publishing industry, and gyms, just to name a few of them.

As with so many groups supporting these “pandemic measures”, just follow the money. It explains a lot about their actions. Yes, it sounds cynical to equate these decisions with selling out, but what other explanations are there?

(1) https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/serv-info/tax/business/topics/cers/statistics/cers_tbl2.pdf
(2) Canada Emergency Rental Subsidy
(3) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/wage-rent-subsidies/emergency-rent-subsidy/cers-statistics.html
(4) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(5) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(6) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(7) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch

(A.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(A.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(A.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(A.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(A.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(A.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(A.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(A.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(A.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money
(A.10) Gyms, Fitness Centres Getting CEWS As They Mandate Masks, Vaxx Passports
(A.11) CERS, The Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy For Businesses

Posted on

Gyms, Fitness Centers Getting The CEWS As They Enforce Vaccine Passports

Ever wonder why your local gym, health club, fitness centers, yoga outlet, or related institution was so keen to enforce the so-called “vaccine passports”? Maybe, just maybe, they were paid off to do so. The above listings include private gyms and some chains.

CEWS is an acronym for “Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy”, and the program is pretty self explanatory. For most businesses, salaries are the largest expense, by far.

Keep in mind, there are other programs, like the rental subsidy.

The last image requires an explanation. It’s from a gym in British Columbia that requires patrons to have the vaccine passport and to register with the front desk. However, that same gym supports and advocates for the rights and choices of the RCMP in this matter. As most know: the RCMP is the enforcement arm of medical tyranny throughout most of Canada. This company demands its customers have the vaxx pass, you know, the people who pay the salaries. But, they “back the blue” in their fight with Ottawa. And yes, this particular gym is also getting CEWS, which shouldn’t surprise anyone.

This continues the list of institutions that are getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, trucking associations, chambers of commerce, financial institutions, and the publishing industry, to name a few.

Remember: things often don’t make sense until you see the entire picture. This site tries to show you as much of it as possible, and money seems to always be the driving factor.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(2) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(3) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(4) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch

(A.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(A.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(A.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(A.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(A.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(A.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(A.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(A.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(A.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money

(B.1) Unifor, Media, In Bed With Gov’t, $595M
(B.2) Government Subsidizes Media To Ensure Positive Coverage
(B.3) Postmedia Subsidies/Connections, Lack Of Real Journalism
(B.4) Latest “Pandemic Bucks” Grants In 2021, Lorrie Goldstein
(B.5) Nordstar; Torstar; Metroland Media; Subsidies & Monopoly
(B.6) Aberdeen Publishing Takes Handouts, Ignores Real Issues
(B.7) More Periodicals Taking Grants, Parroting Gov’t Narrative
(B.8) Tri-City News, LMP Pulls Bonnie Henry Article; Pandemic Bucks
(B.9) Black Press Group; Media Outlet Doxing Of Convoy Donors
(B.10) Subsidized Fact-Check Outlets Run By Political Operatives
(B.11) Digital Citizen Contribution Program: Funds To Combat “Misinformation”
(B.12) Counter Intelligence “Disinformation Prevention” Groups Are Charities
(B.13) CIVIX, More Grants To Combat “Disinformation” In 2021, Domestic, Foreign
(B.14) PHAC Supporting #ScienceUpFirst Counter Intel Effort
(B.15) Rockefeller Spends $13.5 To Combat Misinformation
(B.16) Media, Banks, CU, Getting CDA Emergency Wage Subsidies (CEWS)
(B.17) John Tory’s Sister Board Member At Bell; CEWS; Subsidies
(B.18) True North Not Honest About Bailouts/Subsidies It Receives

(C.1) Media, Facebook, Google, Tech Collusion To Create “Trust” Networks
(C.2) CommonTrust, Commons Project, WEF, Rockefeller, Health Passes
(C.3) C2PA; Project Origin; Content Authenticity Initiative; CBC-BBC-Microsoft
(C.4) Public Media Alliance, Global Task Force, Brussels Declaration
(C.5) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Govt/NGO Funded Counter-Intelligence
(C.6) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Open Source Intelligence Gathering

Posted on

(Now Available) Borderless Canada: Replacement Migration & Fifth Columnists Operating Within

With all the content given out, occasionally, an ad needs to be run. And this is another book. The 4th one, Borderless Canada, is now available both in paperback and as an e-book. This helps support the costs of running the website, and ensures the information reaches a wider audience.

Borderless Canada: The many hidden costs of the mass migration policies, including economic, social, and cultural. This couldn’t have happened without many subversive interests pushing it. Many know that politicians act as puppets, but not how deep it goes.

Most people aren’t remotely aware of what’s happening on the subjects of borders and immigration. Nor do they grasp the full extent of subversion agents and NGOs working towards these goals. Partly, this is intentional, as politicians and media figures aren’t interested in a fully informed public. You think those subsidies are just a form of charity?

This cannot be explained as simple incompetence or cluelessness. The replacement of the West has long been a deliberate aim.

Also, this isn’t a partisan issue. The bulk of the “right wing” in Canadian politics supports this destruction, as do many of their voters. They just insist it be done legally, and with economic benefits.

Of course, earlier publications are still available.

Twenty Twenty-One: A condensed form of this research into the fake pandemic in Canada. Hard details and stats provided throughout, refuting virtually all major Government claims. Spoiler, there isn’t a “pandemic” at all.

Inside The Ontario Science Table: The sequel focuses on the “independent experts” calling for Ford to keep the Province locked down, and pushing and pandemic narrative. The ties to the University of Toronto and big pharma run very deep.

The Green Bankers Cartel: There’s a lot more than meets the eye to the climate change movement. Far from the image of being grassroots, the financial sector sees it as opportunity. Useful idiots support it anyway, without realizing that they advocate for policies that ensure their own enslavement. We are told “The debate is over” as a means of stifling legitimate concerns and inquiries.

All of these are available online either as ebooks, or paperback.

Posted on

Psychological Industry In Canada Too Cozy With Big Pharma

When psychological and psychiatric association groups are getting the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS), it stands to reason that they won’t push too hard against the pharma narrative. While the examples here aren’t exhaustive, they do raise some questions about how close these groups really are. Hundreds more results come when a more generic search for psychologist or psychiatrist is entered.

For some clarity….
(A) Psychologist: has a PhD, is licensed, and able to provide mental health services
(B) Psychiatrist: a medical doctor, different license, and allowed to prescribe medications

This continues the list of institutions getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, trucking associations, and Chambers of Commerce, to name a few.

The Canadian Psychiatric Association also has some interesting business relationships, according to the information on its website:

[The CPA] is one of five founding members of the Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health (CAMIMH) Established in 1998, CAMIMH is now the largest coalition of consumers and families, health care and social service providers, professional associations, and community and research organizations. It advocates with one voice urging health and social policy makers to put mental health on their agendas to create a national action plan for mental illness and mental health.

This all sounds fine and good until one actually looks up the Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health. Scrolling to the bottom of their “partners” page, we see Innovative Medicines Canada is one of the major sponsors. This organization acts as a lobbyist for most of the big pharma companies in this country.

And who does Innovative Medicines represent? Here are the names, provided from their own website. All of the big names are there, and they’re busy lobbying in the Provinces and at the Federal level.

It shouldn’t really come as a surprise that the Canadian Psychiatric Association has direct ties to the largest pharma trade group in the nation. How exactly would they get their products to the market without a willing supply of doctors (or dealers) willing to prescribe them? Heck, if the pharmacy groups are in the pocket of drug companies, it’s logical that many psychiatrists would be as well.

Something else to note: these groups which are supposed to protect the psychological and mental health of patients are adamantly pro-trans. This creates a real conflict of interest.

The Canadian Psychiatric Association affirms the following:
1. The CPA opposes all public and private discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression and supports the repeal of discriminatory laws and policies.

2. The CPA supports the passage of laws and policies protecting the rights, legal benefits and privileges of all people regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

3. The CPA supports the provision of high-quality mental and medical health care treatment for all people and, therefore, expects all psychiatrists to provide appropriate, nondiscriminatory treatment to all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

4. The CPA supports efforts to provide fair and safe environments for people who identify as transgender or who are gender variant or gender nonconforming in institutional settings, such as supportive living environments, long-term care facilities, nursing homes, treatment facilities, shelters and prisons. The CPA also supports access to appropriate treatment in institutional settings for people of all gender identities and expressions, including gender transition therapies.

5. The CPA supports efforts to provide safe and secure educational environments at all levels of education, as well as foster care environments and juvenile justice programs, that promote an understanding and acceptance of all youth, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

6. The CPA recognizes the efficacy, benefit and medical necessity of gender transition treatments for appropriately evaluated people and calls upon Provincial Health Insurance Plans to cover these medically necessary treatments.

7. The CPA supports educating psychiatric residents and psychiatrists about how to explore patients’
perceptions of their sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression using LGBTQ-inclusive questions and gender-neutral language. The CPA also supports educating all psychiatric residents and psychiatrists about the potential for mental health care disparities in LGBTQ communities and about some of the specific issues that can apply when working with people who identify as LGBTQ (for example, homophobia and transphobia, family rejection and the coming out process).

8. The CPA opposes the use of reparative or conversion therapy, given that such therapy is based on the assumption that LGBTQ identities indicate a mental disorder and (or) the assumption that the person could and should change their sexual orientation and (or) their gender identity and gender expression.

9. The CPA encourages physician practices, medical schools, hospitals and clinics to broaden any nondiscrimination policies or statements to include sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

10. The CPA encourages the use of respectful and appropriate language with all LGBTQ patients and specifically encourages using the patient’s preferred name and pronouns with transgender patients.

11. The CPA encourages the creation of a welcoming and affirming environment for LGBTQ people by creating an office space and (or) hospital unit that affirms people’s identity (for example, using gender-neutral language on forms and providing gender-inclusive washrooms when possible).

It’s pretty scary to see that the Canadian Psychiatric Association is on board with the globohomo agenda like this. Why might they be? One reason is that people who transition are looking at a lifetime of hormones. This means customers for life. Sure, this sounds cynical, but there doesn’t seem to be any consideration that perhaps these people need help, not mutilation. And if you want your private parts cut off, they support having taxpayers foot the bill.

Even worse, the C.P.A. supports putting biological men in women’s prisons. This endangers all women, especially as they are unable to escape. They are — after all — prisoners.

According to recent lobbying records, the Ontario Psychological Association has been pushing for changes to the law, and it’s pretty scary

To expand the scope of practice for psychologists to prescribe psychotropic drugs and to empower psychologists in Ontario with the ability to write mental health forms

This isn’t to defend psychiatrists, or doctors in general. Yes, they do function — in many ways — as a legitimate form of drug dealer. However, the OPA wants changes so that people without any medical training would be able to prescribe psychotropic drugs. An earlier version of this lobbying included requests to allow psychologists perform assessments for diagnosis and treatment plans.

This is probably a good time to mention that in December 2017 the Wynne Government passed Bill 160, but didn’t implement it. Neither did Ford. This would have forced the disclosure of payoffs to doctors from pharmaceutical companies.

Currently, the B.C. Psychological Association is pushing the Province to include their profession in MSP, which means coverage by taxpayers.

The Alberta Psychologists Association is working on legislation to allow psychologists (who haven’t gone to medical school) to make diagnoses. They also oppose any sort of conversion therapy ban, which again, will likely result in more people transitioning genders. Of course, this will lead to dependency on hormones.

There’s also the Psychology Foundation of Canada. In the annual reports, it goes through various sponsors. In an unsurprising twist, one of them is Pfizer. Other donors include major banks. This is also a registered charity, meaning it’s eligible for tax breaks that many others are not.

There’s definitely more to cover, but this is a start. It’s noteworthy how professional and business interests seem to align with the same policies.

The silence from such groups is deafening when it comes to mental harms inflicted over the last 2 years. The rare mention that does come seems forced. One would think that they’d have been all over it….

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch
(2) https://www.cpa-apc.org
(3) https://www.cpa-apc.org/about-cpa/collaborations-partnerships/
(4) https://www.camimh.ca/
(5) https://lobbyist.oico.on.ca/Pages/Public/PublicSearch/
(6) https://www.lobbyistsregistrar.bc.ca/app/secure/orl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=523&regId=56561438
(7) Psychologists Association Of Alberta
(8) https://psychologistsassociation.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-July-Conversion-Therapy-Fact-Sheet.pdf
(9) https://www.psychologyfoundation.org/
(10) PFC_AnnualReport_2018_FINAL_LowRez

Posted on

Kulvinder Gill’s Frivolous And Vexatious Claim Dismissed As A SLAPP

“[17] I also conclude that these claims are precisely ones that are of the kind that s. 137.1 is designed to discourage and screen out. ”

“[58] For greater clarity, I view all of the expressions or statements complained of by the Plaintiffs to have been made on matters of public interest. The test required by s. 137.1 has been applied to each in order to determine the appropriate result. In each case, I should be taken to have accepted and adopted fully the submissions advanced on behalf of each of the Defendants.” – Justice Stewart

A $12.75 million defamation lawsuit filed in December 2020 has been ended. The Ontario Superior Court ruled that it fully met the criteria for being classified as a SLAPP, and was dismissed. Kulvinder Gill and Ashvinder Lamba demanded millions in damages from online words. They literally tried to bankrupt people they disagreed with on platforms like Twitter.

Perhaps bragging about it in the national papers wasn’t the best idea.

The substance of this came from online postings related to restricting people’s freedoms, and what pharmaceuticals were best during a “pandemic”. (It’s fake, but that’s a discussion for another time).

In a 51 page ruling, Justice Elizabeth Stewart said that it was exactly the sort of case which anti-SLAPP laws were designed for. The sheer number of Defendants, 23, and the amount of money sought was staggering. Despite this, the Plaintiffs never produced any real evidence of damages to justify the millions they demanded.

To be blunt, this case appears to be frivolous and vexatious.

Considering how this came about, and all of the racism accusations leveled in the Statement of Claim, Gill and Lamba are very lucky they weren’t countersued for defamation. The Defendants would have had a much stronger case. Nonetheless, this lawsuit never stood a chance, if it even made it to trial.

A Quick Introduction To Civil Procedure

There are several sections of the Rules of Civil Procedure for Ontario which permit cases to be ended early. Truly meritless Claims and Applications clog up the system, and deserve to be removed.

  • Rule 2.1.01(6) this allows the Registrar to stay or dismiss a proceeding if the proceeding appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court
  • Rule 20: this covers Summary Judgement Applications. Either side can file for one, if it appears that either there is no case, or no valid defense. Appropriate when there are no major issues to resolve
  • Rule 21.01: in order to expedite a case, permits: (a) for the determination, before trial, of a question of law raised by a pleading in an action where the determination of the question may dispose of all or part of the action, substantially shorten the trial or result in a substantial saving of costs; or (b) to strike out a pleading on the ground that it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defense
  • Rule 24: if Plaintiffs are unnecessarily delaying the proceedings, and this can happen in different stages, the Court has the discretion to dismiss it
  • Rule 25.11: an option to strike the pleadings — which does not amount to trying the case — if a pleading is frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of process

Rule 2.1.01(6) is meant for a Registrar, or low-level official. This is restricted to the very obvious cases. The others involve higher standards, and are meant for Justices, Judges or Associate Judges.

In the case of defamation lawsuits, Section 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act provides another remedy. If a Plaintiff is using the Courts as a weapon to silence discourse on an important public issue, this can be stopped by filing an anti-SLAPP Motion.

SLAPP Means Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation

This isn’t unique to Ontario. There are other Provinces and U.S. States which have very similar laws on the books, and the principles are much the same.

Prevention of Proceedings that Limit Freedom of Expression on Matters of Public Interest (Gag Proceedings)
.
Dismissal of proceeding that limits debate
.
Purposes
.
137.1 (1) The purposes of this section and sections 137.2 to 137.5 are,
.
(a) to encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest;
(b) to promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest;
(c) to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and
(d) to reduce the risk that participation by the public in debates on matters of public interest will be hampered by fear of legal action.

Once a SLAPP Motion is brought forward, it freezes everything else. Nothing can happen until this is resolved, which includes possible appeals to the higher Court(s).

It’s important to note that anti-SLAPP applies to speech that’s of a public interest matter. It doesn’t apply to disputes over private issues. Once the Defendant(s) satisfy the Court that the speech is of a public matter, the burden then shifts to the Plaintiff(s). To prevent dismissal, Judge or Justice must be convinced there are grounds to believe that:

  1. the proceeding has substantial merit, and
  2. the moving party has no valid defence in the proceeding; and
  3. the harm likely to be or have been suffered by the responding party as a result of the moving party’s expression is sufficiently serious that the public interest in permitting the proceeding to continue outweighs the public interest in protecting that expression.

If the Plaintiff cannot meet all 3 parts of this test, then the case qualifies as a SLAPP. Here, the Court found that they didn’t meet even a single prong of the test. As such, the Court had no choice but to dismiss the case. And as the Justice stated, the laws were designed for cases like this.

The Ontario Libel & Slander Act has built in provisions which allow for the protection of certain categories of speech. These include fair comment and qualified privilege, which were heavily referenced in the Decision.

Justification
.
22 In an action for libel or slander for words containing two or more distinct charges against the plaintiff, a defence of justification shall not fail by reason only that the truth of every charge is not proved if the words not proved to be true do not materially injure the plaintiff’s reputation having regard to the truth of the remaining charges

Fair comment
.
23 In an action for libel or slander for words consisting partly of allegations of fact and partly of expression of opinion, a defence of fair comment shall not fail by reason only that the truth of every allegation of fact is not proved if the expression of opinion is fair comment having regard to such of the facts alleged or referred to in the words complained of as are proved.

Fair comment
.
24 Where the defendant published defamatory matter that is an opinion expressed by another person, a defence of fair comment by the defendant shall not fail for the reason only that the defendant or the person who expressed the opinion, or both, did not hold the opinion, if a person could honestly hold the opinion.

Communications on Public Interest Matters
Application of qualified privilege
.
25 Any qualified privilege that applies in respect of an oral or written communication on a matter of public interest between two or more persons who have a direct interest in the matter applies regardless of whether the communication is witnessed or reported on by media representatives or other persons.

It’s important to know that there are safeguards written into the Act. These are just some of them. A free society can’t function properly if speech is weaponized like this.

Could This Dismissal Be Appealed?

In theory, yes. Rule 61.04 allows 30 days to file a Notice of Appeal. However, given how badly the case went, Gill and Lamba would have to be pretty dense to even try. It’s a high burden.

Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002, sets out the standard for review of a decision. Broadly speaking, Appeals are heard because of an alleged error of fact or law.
(i) The standard of review for findings of fact is such that they cannot be reversed unless the trial judge has made a “palpable and overriding error”. A palpable error is one that is plainly seen.
(ii) By contrast, a possible error of law is treated “de novo”, and looked at as if hadn’t been ruled on before. It might be viewed as a lower standard.

The reasoning behind “giving deference” to the factual findings is that the Judge is there, and more able to assess what’s going on. Also, there has to be some presumption of competence.

The Justice stated that there was no evidence of damages, the tweets were about public interest matters, and not defamatory. These are findings of fact, and unless something obvious is missed, not easy to challenge. In short, a hypothetical appeal would go absolutely nowhere.

What About Costs For The Defendants?

In the ruling, the Justice gave the Defendants 30 days to make submissions for costs. And here’s where things get more interesting.

There are 19 lawyers listed for the Defendants in the REASONS FOR DECISION. While it’s unclear how much the total fees are, it’s likely a lot. This case involved depositions, and a SLAPP Motion. Both of these are expensive and time consuming. Estimating an average $30,000 each — which may be at the low end — this case would have cost them over half a million to defend.

It’s quite possible that the Plaintiffs could each be on the hook for well over $100,000. Although most allegations didn’t involve Ashvinder Lamba, she clearly participated in the suit.

The final ruling made it clear that there was no evidence of damages, and that the issues addressed were public matters. Despite the tone in some of the messages, they were protected speech. The suit was frivolous and vexatious, so a stiff award can be expected.

What Exactly Started All Of This?

In the case of Gill and Lamba, this case arose largely over Twitter spats. The Plaintiffs (primarily Gill), got into arguments with people on Twitter, which later ended with her blocking them. I guess there’s a little Rempel in all of us.

These other people — who they later sued — were promoting vaccines and martial law measures, for a non-existent virus. Gill, to her credit, opposed these restrictions, but promoted alternative medicines, again for a non-existent virus. However, this was Twitter nonsense, and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Instead of ignoring people if there was such a disagreement, Gill, Lamba, and their representative were documenting and archiving social media posts. To a casual observer, it appears as these may have been planned as a way of generating evidence. In the end, Gill and Lamba sued 23 doctors, media personalities, and media outlets, over relatively harmless comments.

One has to wonder if this was just an overreaction, or a calculated way to silence differing views. Most people supporting freedom want more speech available, not less.

Even on the miniscule chance that this lawsuit had been successful, what was the goal? Suing private parties doesn’t result in changes to public policy. There’s no way that any money (besides a nominal amount) would ever have been awarded. If anything, it makes lockdown objectors appear unprincipled, despite claiming to support freedom.

After the costs are paid, this won’t really be the end. Expect this decision to be a standard for dismissing meritless defamation claims. We now have a precedent of lockdown opponents trying — and failing — to silence and bankrupt their critics. Gill and Lamba will become very well known by lawyers, but for all the wrong reasons.

This isn’t to defend people like Abdu Sharkawy, and the quackery promoted. This site has exposed many of the hacks, and media payoffs. Nonetheless, this lawsuit did an enormous disservice to real resistance in Canada. The Plaintiffs can honestly say that they fought, and won, a baseless lawsuit.

If there is something positive in all of this, it’s that the Ontario Superior Court did throw out an abusive case because of the chilling effect it would have on public discourse. Read both the Statement of Claim, and Decision for more context. As absurd as these “health measures” are, throwing the suit out really was the right decision.

(1) Gill & Lamba v. Maciver decision CV-20-652918-0000 – 24 Feb 2022
(2) Gill & Lamba Defamation Lawsuit
(3) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/rro-1990-reg-194/latest
(4) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-c43/latest/rso-1990-c-c43.html
(5) https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2002/2002scc33/2002scc33.html
(6) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-l12/latest/rso-1990-c-l12.html
(7) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-lawsuit-thrown-out-after-anti-vaccine-doctors-sue-over-challenges-to/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
(8) https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/doctor-who-said-canada-doesnt-need-covid-vaccine-calls-online-critics-hyenas-in-6-8m-libel-suit