UN/WHO – Page 18 – Canuck Law

June 8, 2021

CV #25(F): Ottawa Launching Vaccine Passports At Instigation Of WHO-IHR, 7th Meeting

This is a sequel to the last article. Vaccine passports are coming to Canada, but where did the order come from?

On June 4, 2021, the World Health Organization handed down instructions on proceeding with vaccine passports. On June 7, (yesterday), the Federal Government posted an invitation to bid on the creation of a biometric tracking system, which would most likely include a form of vaccine passport.

For some context of the situation: (a) the International Health Regulations are legally binding; (b) the 2005 Quarantine Act came from WHO; (c) WHO manages the “pandemic”; and (d) PHAC was created in 2004 at the instigation of the WHO.

Now, about the report itself:

Given this recommendation from the IHR Emergency Committee meeting, the Smart Vaccination Certificate Secretariat has expanded the scope of the initiative to develop guidance that includes SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 recovery status. Accordingly, the Smart Vaccination Certificate specification will be renamed as the “Digital Documentation of COVID-19 Certificates (DDCC)” specification. The resulting guidance will be published in a series of three separate documents, which will guide Member States on how to digitally document COVID-19 vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 test results, and COVID-19 recovery status. These guidance documents will include critical components such as the minimum datasets, expected functionality of digital systems, and preferred terminology code systems. They will also include a section on national digital architecture, recognizing that Member States are still expected to decide how they want to implement these systems. The DDCC specifications will include an HL7 FHIR Implementation Guide (IG), including example software implementations.

This page from the IHR Emergency Committee lays out in broad strokes what shall be contained in these vaccine passports. However, the implementation will be left to individual countries.

Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister announced new “privileges” for people who have taken the “vaccine”. See 15:00 in video. Keep in mind, these are experimental, not approved by Health Canada, and manufacturers are exempt from liability.

Rebel News published a portion of Manitoba’s “top doctor” saying that the Province is introducing their own version of the vaccine passport. Nothing nefarious, he claimed. It was just in case it was needed. Now, why did Brent Roussin say there was no specified purpose?

These guidance documents will make no reference to the specific circumstances under which these certificates should be used. Such guidance will be made available in separate guidance documents published by WHO (e.g. DG temporary recommendations to States Parties after IHR Emergency Committees; WHO’s interim guidance documents on considerations for the implementation of public health and social measures; WHO’s interim guidance documents on considerations for a risk-based approach to international travel in the context of COVID-19; etc.).

It could be because all parties were INSTRUCTED to say that there was no specific purpose for these vaccine certificates. That’s what it sounds like. Countries were instructed to develop these “digital systems” but not specify what they were to be used for.

Additionally, in line with the change in scope, WHO DDCC specifications will not include a section on global architecture for a Global Health Trust Framework. At point in this time, WHO does not intend to implement a Global Health Trust Framework to store the digital public keys of members states, to facilitate the validation and verification of digitally signed COVID-19 certificates (e.g., vaccination certificates, SARS-CoV-2 test certificates, and COVID-19 recovery status certificates) across borders.

WHO states that it does not intend to establish a global system to track vaccination status, for now. The key words are “at this point in time”. That could very easily change later. And no, this isn’t just something they are pondering.

WHO is soliciting proposals for experts to inform the definition of specifications and standards related to interoperability, governance, and design for a personal digital vaccination certificate, in preparation for COVID-19 vaccine availability. Please follow instructions, detailed below, to nominate experts, by 17:00 CET on December 14, 2020.

Furthermore, as detailed in the International Health Regulations (2005), WHO has the mandate to coordinate among member states to provide a public health response to the international spread of diseases. Currently, yellow fever is the only disease expressly listed in the International Health Regulations for which countries can require proof of vaccination from travellers as a condition of entry into a country. WHO has a mandate to take a coordinating role to ensure that member states are equipped and ready for the anticipated global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. For effective implementation of COVID-19 vaccines, global coordination of relevant data management principles and processes is needed to account for and facilitate coherent implementation of transmission prevention and control by all member states.

The Smart Vaccination Certificate consortium will bring together experts to focus on defining specifications and standards for a digital vaccination certificate that would serve current and future requirements, toward the dual purpose of (1) facilitating monitoring of national COVID-19 vaccination programs as well as (2) supporting cross-border uses architected for a potential future in which the COVID-19 vaccine would be included in an updated version of the International Health Regulations.

Late last year, WHO put out an offer for bids on establishing digital vaccine certificates. WHO also admits that vaccination will be included in the next edition of the International Health Regulations, which again, are legally binding.

In April 2021, WHO released a paper opening discussing the pros and cons of mandatory vaccination. In March, 23 countries agreed in principle with establishing a global order to address outbreaks in the future.

Remember last Spring, when the idea of mandatory vaccines and vaccine passports were dismissed as crazy conspiracy theories?

(1) https://www.who.int/news/item/04-06-2021-revised-scope-and-direction-for-the-smart-vaccination-certificate-and-who-s-role-in-the-global-health-trust-framework
(2) https://www.who.int/news/item/19-04-2021-statement-on-the-seventh-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-pandemic
(3) https://www.who.int/news/item/30-10-2020-statement-on-the-fifth-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-pandemic
(4) https://www.who.int/news-room/articles-detail/world-health-organization-open-call-for-nomination-of-experts-to-contribute-to-the-smart-vaccination-certificate-technical-specifications-and-standards-application-deadline-14-december-2020
(5) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/340841/WHO-2019-nCoV-Policy-brief-Mandatory-vaccination-2021.1-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(6) https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/op-ed—covid-19-shows-why-united-action-is-needed-for-more-robust-international-health-architecture
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62-who-legally-binding-international-health-regulations-ihr/
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62b-canadas-actions-were-dictated-by-whos-legally-binding-international-health-regulations/
(9) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62c-the-2005-quarantine-act-bill-c-12-was-actually-written-by-who/
(10) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62f-international-or-global-treaty-for-pandemic-preparedness-and-response-proposed/
(11) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62g-public-health-agency-of-canada-created-as-branch-of-who-bill-c-12-phac-act/

June 6, 2021

CV #27(C): Share Verified Uses Emotional Manipulation, Selective Truth To Promote Narrative

Not even Wikipedia is safe from being used as a staging ground to promote official narratives. Here, a volunteer brags about editing pages to be consistent with the “latest information”.

This piece will contain some overlap with the work from Civilian Intelligence Network. Go check out their article for extra information.

Share Verified works in a way that can be best described as emotional manipulation. In practice, the promote an appeal to authority, where only certain sources should be trusted. They attempt to dissuade real research by gaslighting such things as misinformation, but in a passive aggressive way.

As the world confronts its biggest challenge in living memory, there has never been a greater need for accurate, verified information. Like the virus itself, misinformation spreads from person-to-person, heightening the risk to health and spreading fear and division. The world cannot contain the disease and its impacts without access to trusted, accurate information that promotes science and real solutions – and builds solidarity within and between nations.

Verified is an initiative of the United Nations, in collaboration with Purpose, to provide content that cuts through the noise to deliver life-saving information, fact-based advice and stories from the best of humanity.

By promoting and sharing Verified content, everyday people can play a crucial role in the work of Verified by spreading reliable information about COVID-19 to their friends, families and social networks, with the goal of saving lives and countering misinformation. Organisations, businesses, civil society and media platforms partner with Verified to spread information that helps protect people, communities and forges connections across the planet.

Verified’s team of communicators, creatives and researchers produce content based on the latest information and guidance from the United Nations, the World Health Organisation and other UN agencies. We work with leading experts on misinformation First Draft.

Verified works with the support of Luminate, IKEA Foundation and UN Foundation and partners all over the world.

An important detail to point out is that Share Verified (a UN initiative) is not working alone. It has partnered with many other NGOs to collaborate on this narrative.

Luminate is funded by the Omidyar Group, named after Pierre Omidyar, the founder of eBay. Omidyar’s groups are involved in media manipulation, and include the NGOs “Reset”, and “Reset Australia”. Check the link for more information.
The IKEA Foundation seems like a bizarre one to be promoting this narrative. However, once you look at their partners, it makes sense. These include: Carbon Trust, Carnegie Council, Climate Analytics, Clinton Health Access Initiative, European Climate Foundation, UNCHR, UNICEF, UNDP and the World Bank Group.
First Draft News claims to be a news outlet devoted to countering misinformation on a variety of topics. Its donors include:
1. Bernard and Anne Spitzer Charitable Trust
2. Craig Newmark Philanthropies
3. Democracy Fund
4. Facebook Journalism Project
5. Ford Foundation
6. Google News Initiative
7. John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
8. The Klarman Family Foundation
9. Media Democracy Fund
10. The Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust
11. Rita Allen Foundation
12. Swiss Democracy Fund
13. Open Society Foundations
14. Wellcome Trust
Various UN Groups work with Share Verified, and in fact, it’s a branch of the organization. It could even be referred to as a media arm of the World Health Organization

Does anyone see anything wrong with a “medical doctor” spending her time online to edit pages on Wikipedia in order to influence the medical decisions of people who are not patients, and whom she has never examined? Really? Anyone?

The Vaccine Confidence Project, and the London School for Hygiene & Tropical Medicine receive funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and from drug companies. Just a thought, but perhaps they have an interest in pushing vaccines on the public.

Share Verified recommends pushing their talking points as a form of innoculation. They claim that people will be better able to sort through misinformation when the time comes.

In practice, in means prepping others with pre-set answers, so that questions or concerns (regardless of legitimacy) can be countered. A great way — although manipulative — to counter others is to simply attack the information as lies, but without addressing any key points.

Share Verified promotes the VCP, but who runs it?

A bit of background information here. The VCP, Vaccine Confidence Program, is part of the LSHTM, or London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Both receive extensive funding from pharmaceutical companies, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, and Governments.

Who else is worth noting?

Board member, Carlos Alban (AbbVie)
Board member, Bill Anderson (Roche)
Board Member, Gabriel Baertschi (Grünenthal)
Board member, Anders Blanck (LIF)
Board Member, Olivier Charmeil (Sanofi)
Board Member, Alberto Chiesi (Chiesi)
Board member, Frank Clyburn (MSD)
Board Member, Eric Cornut (Menarini)
Board member, Richard Daniell (Teva Pharmaceutical Europe)
Board member, Johanna Friedl-Naderer (Biogen)
Board Member, Murdo Gordon (Amgen)
Board member, Peter Guenter (Merck)
Board member, Angela Hwang (Pfizer)
Board member, Enrica Giorgetti (Farmindustria)
Board member, Dirk Kosche (Astellas)
Board member, Jean-Luc Lowinski (Pierre Fabre)
Board member, Catherine Mazzacco (LEO Pharma)
Board member, Johanna Mercier (Gilead)
Board member, Luke Miels (GSK)
Board member, Gianfranco Nazzi (Almirall)
Board member, Oliver O’Connor (IPHA)
Board Member, Stefan Oelrich (Bayer)
Board member, Giles Platford (Takeda)
Board member, Antonio Portela (Bial)
Board member, Iskra Reic (AstraZeneca)
Board Member, Susanne Schaffert (Novartis)
Board member, Stefan Schulze (VIFOR PHARMA)
Board Member, Kris Sterkens (Johnson & Johnson)
Board member, Han Steutel (vfa)
Board member, Alfonso Zulueta (Eli Lilly)

One of the major donors of the Vaccine Confidence Project is the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). It’s Board is made of up members representing major big pharma companies.

Another donor of VCP is the Innovative Medicine Institute. Salah-Dine Chibout is on the Governing Board of IMI, and also is the Global Head of Discovery and Investigational Safety at Novartis. Additionally, Paul Stoffels is the Chief Scientific Officer at Johnson & Johnson, Worldwide Chairman of Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson.

Share Verified promotes the VCP, which is funded by drug companies. Even the “independent” sponsors have ties to those same pharma organizations. Perhaps this is a serious conflict of interest.

And if that isn’t creepy enough, there is at least one (probably more) instruction manual on how to speak to people in order to get them to take vaccines. It gives plenty of tips on what type of emotional and psychological appeals to make, depending on the person.

Emotions to avoid

Sadness. Sadness can be helpful in gaining short-term engagement, but isn’t helpful over the long term. We are motivated to maintain a positive sense of ourselves, and tend to ignore information that makes us feel bad about our choices or doesn’t affirm our worldview.

Shame. It’s tempting to shame people for not choosing to get the vaccine. But as we’ve seen with mask wearing, shame activates people’s moral reasoning and they’ll find reasons why their choice is the right one to avoid feeling bad about themselves.

Fear. Using fear appeals can be effective when there’s a clear call to action, but in this case, it’s more likely that fear appeals will immobilize people. Fear motivates people to assess information systematically, so we may pay more attention to information when we are afraid. Public health scholars have found a relationship between fear and perceptions of personal or group risk. If the risk doesn’t seem relevant to an individual’s life, they won’t experience fear and are more likely to disengage from or discount the message. If people are seeing messages that suggest that the risks of COVID-19 are minimal, they’re unlikely to engage. People can experience fear when the consequences of risk are uncertain and they feel like they do not have control over the outcome. So using a fear-based message could damage more constructive efforts to demonstrate how taking the vaccine offers control.

We don’t want to shame people because they might thinking for themselves.

An interesting point: “FEAR MOTIVATES PEOPLE AT ASSESS INFORMATION SYSTEMATICALLY, SO WE MAY PAY MORE ATTENTION BECAUSE WE ARE AFRAID”. In other words, it’s recommended against using fear, but not out of human compassion. It’s because scared people are more likely to do their own research.

In case the term “emotional manipulation” may come off as hyperbolic, it’s not. These quotes are from pages 39 to 41 in the instruction manual. It was published by the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications in partnership with Purpose and the United Nations Verified initiative.

And of course, if that doesn’t work, Dominic LeBlanc and other politicians seem to have no issues with just passing laws to ban whatever they call “misinformation”. Of course, the WHO is on board with such measures.

What is the takeaway from all of this? It’s that the pro-pandemic, pro-vaccine, pro-mask messages are a lot more planned, coordinated, and calculated that one might think. Now, go read the CIN article.

(1) https://civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2021/05/30/global-public-relations-fountainhead-of-covid19-propaganda/
(2) http://shareverified.com
(3) https://content.shareverified.com/
(4) https://shareverified.com/en/about/
(5) https://vimeo.com/456733600
(6) https://vimeo.com/444943417
(7) https://vimeo.com/435078865
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/omidyar-group-luminate-reset-reset-australia-push-for-a-misinformation-ban/
(9) https://ikeafoundation.org/story/equal-access-to-covid-19-vaccines-and-hope/
(10) https://ikeafoundation.org/about/partners/
(11) https://firstdraftnews.org/
(12) https://firstdraftnews.org/about/
(13) https://www.un.org/en/coronavirus/%E2%80%98verified%E2%80%99-initiative-aims-flood-digital-space-facts-amid-covid-19-crisis
(14) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/
(15) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/team
(16) https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/partners-funders
(17) https://www.efpia.eu/about-us/who-we-are/
(18) https://www.imi.europa.eu/about-imi/governance/governing-board
(19) https://covid19vaccinescommunicationprinciples.org/?akid=198.9687.bN5LTs&rd=1&t=6
(20) https://covid19vaccinescommunicationprinciples.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/vaccine-principles_v16.pdf
(21) Guide To Covid Vaccine Communications

June 5, 2021February 3, 2022

(Charity) McMaster University; Bill Gates; Future Of Canada Project; Nexus For Infectious Diseases

McMaster University, located in Hamilton, ON, is a registered charity. Beyond that, there some interesting things about it that are worth covering. Many questions need to be answered/

Even though McMaster is a school in Ontario, its “charitable operations” go on in dozens of countries across the world. Looking at some of its recent financial information from the Canada Revenue Agency:

Operations Outside Canada
41 countries

BRAZIL
CHILE
CHINA
COLOMBIA
CROATIA
DENMARK
ECUADOR
EGYPT
FRANCE
GERMANY
GHANA
INDIA
ISRAEL
ITALY
JAMAICA
JAPAN
JORDAN
KENYA
KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
KUWAIT
MALAYSIA
MEXICO
NETHERLANDS
NIGERIA
OMAN
PAKISTAN
PERU
PHILIPPINES
POLAND
QATAR
ROMANIA
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
SAUDI ARABIA
SINGAPORE
SPAIN
THAILAND
UGANDA
UKRAINE
UNITED KINGDOM
UNITED STATES
VIET NAM

April 2016 Financial Information
Receipted donations $19,830,823.00 (2.08%)
Non-receipted donations $40,427.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $14,732,570.00 (1.54%)
Government funding $406,414,303.00 (42.58%)
All other revenue $513,390,877.00 (53.79%)
Total revenue: $954,409,000.00

Charitable programs $900,233,769.00 (97.27%)
Management and administration $19,971,238.00 (2.16%)
Fundraising $5,107,992.00 (0.55%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $166,644.00 (0.02%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $925,479,643.00

Professional and consulting fees: $17,739,375.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2017 Financial Information
Receipted donations $21,327,902.00 (1.95%)
Non-receipted donations $19,777.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $11,713,156.00 (1.07%)
Government funding $406,419,787.00 (37.18%)
All other revenue $653,674,378.00 (59.80%)
Total revenue: $1,093,155,000.00

Charitable programs $940,084,196.00 (97.51%)
Management and administration $18,669,883.00 (1.94%)
Fundraising $5,161,921.00 (0.54%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $188,122.00 (0.02%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)

Professional and consulting fees: $15,270,211.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2018 Financial Information
Receipted Donations $28,195,811.00 (2.54%)
Non-receipted donations $24,210.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $10,048,610.00 (0.91%)
Government funding $415,125,450.00 (37.41%)
All other revenue $656,153,919.00 (59.14%)
Total revenue: $1,109,548,000.00

Charitable programs $961,418,445.00 (97.53%)
Management and administration $19,244,819.00 (1.95%)
Fundraising $5,055,736.00 (0.51%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $89,275.00 (0.01%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $985,808,275.00

Professional and consulting fees: $15,462,907.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2019 Financial Information
Receipted donations $23,270,581.00 (1.95%)
Non-receipted donations $18,348.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $12,121,901.00 (1.02%)
Government funding $425,547,839.00 (35.67%)
All other revenue $732,051,331.00 (61.36%)
Total revenue: $1,193,010,000.00

Charitable programs $1,009,277,253.00 (97.41%)
Management and administration $21,506,655.00 (2.08%)
Fundraising $5,234,092.00 (0.51%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $80,349.00 (0.01%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $1,036,098,349.00

Professional and consulting fees: $15,506,579.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

April 2020 Financial Information
Receipted donations $21,381,040.00 (1.84%)
Non-receipted donations $10,738.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $15,237,139.00 (1.31%)
Government funding $429,859,247.00 (37.03%)
All other revenue $694,481,836.00 (59.82%)
Total revenue: $1,160,970,000.00

Charitable programs $1,040,103,095.00 (97.31%)
Management and administration $23,068,981.00 (2.16%)
Fundraising $5,500,725.00 (0.51%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $83,868.00 (0.01%)
Total expenses: $1,068,900,000.00

Professional and consulting fees: $17,478,767.00
Compensated full-time positions:
$350,000 and over: 10

In addition to being a billion dollar enterprise, this “charity” pays its top Executives over $350,000/year. Perhaps that contributes to tuition being as expensive as it is.

Link to search IRS charity tax records:
https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

Let’s clarify here: there are actually 2 separate entities. The Foundation is the group that distributes money to various organizations and institutions. The Foundation Trust, however, is concerned primarily about asset management.

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
EIN: 56-2618866
gates.foundation.taxes.2016
gates.foundation.taxes.2017
gates.foundation.taxes.2018

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
EIN: 91-1663695
gates.foundation.trust.taxes.2018

McMaster claimed to have isolated the virus that causes Covid-19. That’s very interesting, considering that when Fluoride Free Peel did a freedom of information request for it, there were no records available.

A cynic might wonder if $21 million in donations from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to McMaster might have had anything to do with that isolation issue.

Bit of a side note: Kashif Pirzada, one of the “TV experts” on the news calling for repressive medical tyranny, is a Professor at McMaster University.

The Lung Health Foundation and Canada’s Global Nexus for Pandemics and Biological Threats have partnered to provide Canadians with evidence-based, timely information on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, infectious respiratory diseases and other public health measures put in place to manage risk and improve peoples’ health.

Canada’s Global Nexus researchers, based at McMaster University, will provide data and evidence about pandemic topics that will be used by the Lung Health Foundation in customized public education and awareness tools to strengthen Canadians’ understanding of how to protect themselves, their loved ones and their communities.

These public education materials will include accurate layperson summaries and infographics and may evolve into public discussion roundtables, policy briefings and advocacy activities. The two partners will explore topics ranging from vaccine approval and rollout to diagnostic testing capacity and economic and social policies.

“Canadians are bombarded with mass information and misinformation about COVID-19 daily, leaving too many with uncertainty and confusion,” says Peter Glazier, Executive Vice President of the Lung Health Foundation. “Together with Canada’s Global Nexus for Pandemics and Biological Threats, the Lung Health Foundation will provide the clear, consistent and fact-based information Canadians can trust to help stay safe and make informed decisions about vaccines.”

Collaboration is key to success, says Gerry Wright, lead, Canada’s Global Nexus for Pandemics and Biological Threats at McMaster University. Wright is a global expert in antibiotic resistance and scientific director of McMaster’s Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Infectious Disease Research.

McMaster is partnering on a number of different issues, such as combatting what they deem to be “misinformation“. Of course, there is a significant conflict of interest, since McMaster’s people will also be doing some of the modelling and advance vaccine research.

If this “pandemic” were to end, a lot of people would find themselves out of work.

There is also the Future of Canada Project, which acts as a form of thinktank to promote different visions for where Canada should end up in recent years. Its Council includes Lloyd Axworthy, and several “journalists” such as Peter Mansbridge.

McMaster is also very involved in advancing the vaccine agenda. Funny how terms like “interim authorization” and “manufacturer indemnification” seem noticeably absent from the conversation.

The details are too extensive to cover in a single article, but there is a lot more to this university than meets the eye.

One of the firms managing McMaster’s endowment fund (gifts and donations), is Blackrock, which owns SNC Lavalin, and has ties to the CCP.

Just remember, whenever someone donates to this institution, it is considered a charitable contribution for tax purposes. That means that the public is forced to subsidized these payments.

What’s really going on at McMaster?

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch
(2) McMaster University Charity Details, CRA
(3) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/
(4) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
(5) https://healthsci.mcmaster.ca/home/2020/03/13/mcmaster-researcher-plays-key-role-in-isolating-covid-19-virus-for-use-in-urgent-research
(6) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/university-of-toronto-sunnybrook-hsc-have-no-record-of-covid-19-virus-isolation/
(7) https://future-of-canada.mcmaster.ca/
(8) https://future-of-canada.mcmaster.ca/council/
(9) https://brighterworld.mcmaster.ca/articles/mcmaster-to-create-and-lead-new-international-nexus-for-pandemics-and-biological-threats/
(10) https://brighterworld.mcmaster.ca/channels/infectious-disease/
(11) https://globalnexus.mcmaster.ca/
(12) https://impact.mcmaster.ca/our-donor-community
(13) https://impact.mcmaster.ca/sites/default/files/story_docs/endowment_brochure_2019-2020.pdf

May 31, 2021December 7, 2021

BC Centre For Disease Control Foundation Is Registered Charity, With Pharma Funding

According to the Canada Revenue Agency, the BCCDC Foundation — British Columbia Centre for Disease Control Foundation — is actually a registered charity. It’s located at 1500-1090 West Georgia Street in vancouver, while the BCCDC (the body) is at 655 W 12th Ave, Vancouver.

The BCCDC Foundation appears to be the fundraising branch of the agency, though it appears to have the same goals.

It turns out that a lot of these “public health” agencies are registered charities, accepting private money. However, more on that later.

Looking at their annual reports, some of the same names keep coming up in terms of partners and donors. Several are pharmaceutical companies.

As disturbing as it sounds, the BCCDC Foundation routinely lists pharmaceutical companies as being major partners and donors in its annual reports. Check out the most recent ones available below.

The BCCDC Foundation is hardly alone in being a registered charity, and accepting donations from private interests. In fact, a check with Canada Revenue Agency reveals that this is normal.

BC Provincial Health Services Authority
Alberta Health Services

Pardon the earlier oversight, but these “public” groups are in fact registered charities, as are countless others of their counterparts. More on that later.

Unfortunately, the publicly available information with the CRA doesn’t list the dollar amounts of contributors. However, it does give insight as to where the money is spent, including giving to “qualified donee”.

2015 to 2016 Donations From BCCDC Foundation
Qualified donee # 1
Name of organization: University of British Columbia
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 108161779RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 111,663.00

Qualified donee # 2
Name of organization: PROVINCIAL HEALTH SERVICES AUTHORITY
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 863530135RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 1,084,366.00

2016 to 2017 Donations From BCCDC Foundation
Qualified donee # 1
Name of organization: University of British Columbia
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 108161779RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 141,967.00
Was any part of the gift intended for political activities?

Qualified donee # 3
Name of organization: BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 851838730RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 41,972.00
Was any part of the gift intended for political activities?

2017 to 2018 Donations From BCCDC Foundation
Qualified donee # 1
Name of organization: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 108161779RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 135,274.00
Was any part of the gift intended for political activities? No

Qualified donee # 3
Name of organization: BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 851838730RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 15,300.00
Was any part of the gift intended for political activities? No

2018 to 2019 Donations From BCCDC Foundation
Qualified donee # 1
Name of organization: University of British Columbia
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 108161779RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 58,714.00
Was any part of the gift intended for political activities? No

2019 to 2020 Donations From BCCDC Foundation
Qualified donee # 1
Name of organization: PROVINCIAL HEALTH SERVICES AUTHORITY
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 863530135RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 588,553.00

Qualified donee # 2
Name of organization: COMMUNITY-BASED RESEARCH CENTRE SOCIETY
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 882078124RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 8,341.00

Qualified donee # 3
Name of organization: UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 108161779RR0001
City: VANCOUVER
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 89,225.00

Qualified donee # 4
Name of organization: PHA PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Associated charity: No
Business number/Registration number: 118818830RR0002
City: VICTORIA
Province/Territory: BC
Amounts of non-cash gifts:
Total amount of gifts: CAN$ 74,626.00

It’s interesting to see that UBC (University of British Columbia) and the BCPHSA (BC Provincial Health Services Authority are the main recipients of money raised by the BCCDC Foundation. The BCPHSA is also a registered charity, and it receives more money from this charity.

The implication is also that UBC, the BCPHSA and the BCCDC are indirectly receiving donations from pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer. That wouldn’t impact the medical guidance it offers, would it?

As an aside, the BCCDC Foundation is also quite heavily into the social justice and anti-racism narrative. Course, that just means that white mean are oppressing everyone else. This institution also supports the whole SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) movement. This is quite the irony, and most minorities are absolutely put off by deviancies these groups push.

The BCCDC Foundation also misrepresents the status of these vaccines in Canada. They were never approved, but given interim authorization, under the guise of being an emergency. These are not the same thing. It’s interesting (though not surprising) that they are funding vaccine research by people from the same institutions they help finance.

And if that isn’t weird or creepy enough, testing and vaccinating cats may soon be on the horizon. Perhaps once the human trials are complete we can start on animals.

The Foundation also works with Genome BC, and one of their major projects is mapping out how vaccine effects can be measured according to genetic makeup. On some level intriguing, but it’s also pretty creepy.

This moment is brought to you by big pharma.

However, it’s a little unclear. Is the BCCDC FINANCING UBC and the BCPHSA, or are they receiving donations from them? Or is money going back and forth?

All of this raises an interesting question. BC Provincial Health Officer, Bonnie Henry, used to run the BCCDC. It’s now getting pharma bucks from companies like Pfizer, who have a financial stake in promoting this pandemic narrative. Is this a conflict of interest for her?

Jennifer Gardy (a Director), used to be an official for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but that isn’t really relevant, is it?

Then again, she had no problem with putting an exemption into her orders to accommodate a Keremeos winery that she co-owned.

There also doesn’t seem to be any issue, with her former handler, Jean-Marc Prevost, accepting a job with Counsel Public Affairs to lobby on behalf of Emergent Biosciences. This is the manufacturer of AstraZeneca.

Now, this is too long to address in a single post, but many of the Provincial or Municipal “Health Authorities” are actually registered charities. See here, for some of them.

Why structure all of these as charities? One obvious answer is to make it more likely for others to donate. After all, a charitable contribution typically results in a tax rebate of around 50%. That means taxpayers are subsidizing these donations. So when companies like Pfizer, Merck and GSK are donating to the BCCDC Foundation, it means the public is partially paying for it.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch
(2) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyRprtngPrd?q.srchNm=bccdc&q.stts=0007&selectedCharityBn=861277309RR0001&dsrdPg=1
(3) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyRprtngPrd?q.srchNm=provincial+health&q.stts=0007&selectedCharityBn=863530135RR0001&dsrdPg=1
(4) https://bccdcfoundation.org/
(5) https://bccdcfoundation.org/a-new-partnership-to-fund-priority-research-on-covid-19-vaccination-in-bc/
(6) https://bccdcfoundation.org/all-resources/decoding-public-health/
(7) https://bccdcfoundation.org/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-and-expression-conversion-efforts-sogiece-dialogue-event-and-research/
(8) https://bccdcfoundation.org/cats-needed-for-covid-19-and-cats-study/
(9) BCCDCF Annual Report 2013-14 Final Report
(10) BCCDCF Annual Report 2014-15 Final Report
(11) BCCDCF Annual Report 2015-16 Final Report
(12) BCCDCF Annual Report 2016-17 Final Report
(13) BCCDCF Annual Report 2017-18 Final Report
(14) BCCDCF Annual Report 2018-19 Final Report
(15) https://twitter.com/BCCDCFoundation
(16) https://twitter.com/GenomeBC
(17) https://twitter.com/msfhr/status/1395417138723049472

May 28, 2021

Twenty Twenty-One Is Now Available

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B095Y515XK

Twenty Twenty-One is now posted on Amazon, as a Kindle product. It covers a lot of the backstory of the “pandemic” which isn’t being covered by any mainstream outlet. The option of paperback is being looked into.

Yes, it would be nice to give it away, however, research and reporting are very time consuming. Thank you to everyone who has helped support the site, and helped keep this going.

If you have friends or family who would be interested in this kind of information, please share it with them.

The content on Canuck Law is still available for all.

A shoutout to Fred, Andy, and the folks at Civilian Intelligence Network.

May 24, 2021May 24, 2021

CV #44(B): BBC’s “Disinformation Specialist Reporter”, Marianna Spring, Is Funded By Gates Money

Marianna Spring works for the BBC, British Broadcasting Corporation, and claims to be a “specialist reporter covering disinformation and social media”. However, after a look through what she covers (and omits), the only logical conclusion is that she is deliberately spreading lies.

As a bit of a side note: Spring doesn’t allow people to comment on her tweets unless she follows them, or has tagged them. For a journalist trying to reach the people, she certainly doesn’t seem to want to hear from them.

According to her profile, she was a full time reporter with BBC, until in March 2020, she was tapped to head up the misinformation coverage in the network. She claims to report and track conspiracy theories and false reporting.

However, there is an interesting omission. Spring doesn’t like to address the people who are funding her employer, the BBC. Specifically, she doesn’t address the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. While it’s far from the only donor, it is a major one, and a regular one at that.

YEAR	PAGE	AMOUNT (UK POUNDS)
2016-2017	35	2,800,000
2017-2018	12	2,150,000
2018-2019	14	2,003,000
2019-2020	17	1,569,000

Notwithstanding donations to her own employer, Spring has shown no interest in covering any of the financial connections between the Gates Foundation, big pharma, and the education industry. Just a thought: when covering conspiracy theories, it may be wise to see if there is any truth to them.

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
EIN: 56-2618866
gates.foundation.taxes.2016
gates.foundation.taxes.2017
gates.foundation.taxes.2018

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
EIN: 91-1663695
gates.foundation.trust.taxes.2018

However, Spring will never get into any of this, nor will she report of the financial interests that drive this “pandemic”. The grants to the World Health Organization, GAVI, the Pirbright Institute, John Hopkins, and many more are instantly available. It’s hard to classify someone as a “journalist” when they are so blind to one side of a story.

Even disregarding Gates, the bulk of the BBC funding comes from the British Government, who supports these martial law measures 100%. Surely Spring and her people know who butters their bread.

“We offer partners a number of benefits which include:

Exclusive invites to networking events, receptions and dinners hosted by BBC correspondents
Getting behind-the-scenes at the BBC with private tours of New Broadcasting House
Exclusive recognition on our website and marketing materials
Case studies of how your donation has impacted our work, for you to use in both internal and external communications
Exclusive opportunities to see and help deliver our work in action, in country.”

The BBC offers partnerships with other organization, and currently, they include Facebook and Twitter. As far as cracking down on “misinformation”, they seem to be ideologically aligned.

The BBC covered the Atlantic Storm pandemic scenario in 2005. Footage is still available of it online. Has Spring not found it strange that all of these preparation cases have been going on for decades?

Facebook has also confirmed that it will be removing content and people that discourages vaccination, REGARDLESS of whether or not it’s true. This is about pushing an agenda, not a search for objective truth. Does Spring not see how precarious her position is if the only way to succeed is to shut down opposing views? After all, she “identifies” as a journalist.

This kind of censorship has a chilling effect, regardless of the subject being discussed.

Volunteers fight back
It was the pandemic’s wave of anti-vaccine content that prompted Dave and Richard to embark on their plan.
.
“I was out of work,” Dave says. “So I wanted to do something constructive.”
.
Although the duo have only met in real life once, they now run multiple “honeypot” Facebook groups that have thousands of members from all over the world.
.
Inside the groups, people who believe in vaccine and Covid-19 conspiracy theories are allowed by the moderators to post false and misleading articles.
.
Richard admits he’s conflicted about the deception.
.
“It was horrible having to lie to begin with,” he says.
.
After members initially joined the group, he says, the pair would observe what they shared, sometimes for weeks.
.
“And then it’d stop,” Richard says, “and we’d start questioning their narrative.”
.
Dave and Richard debunk myths and challenge people in comments under posts and via private message.

Ever get the impression that certain groups and people were honeypots (or feds), deliberately trying to mislead a conversation and steer others away from asking important questions? Turns out, it’s for real. The BBC published an article on doing exactly that.

Rather than condemn such underhanded tactics, Spring tweeted it out approvingly, saying that it was necessary to stop people from falling for conspiracy theories. Does a “misinformation specialist” see nothing wrong with deceiving and misleading the public? Spring is either a fraud, or is engaging in olympic level mental gymnastics.

The screenshot is from last year, but there is a valid point. The U.K. defines “Covid deaths” as:

Number of deaths of people who had had a positive test result for COVID-19 and died within 28 days of the first positive test. Data from the four nations are not directly comparable as methodologies and inclusion criteria vary. Data for the period ending 5 days before the date when the website was last updated with data for the selected area, highlighted in grey, is incomplete.

The death count is for people who’ve had a positive test (real or false positive), and then died within 28 days, irrespective of the cause. This kind of definition opens the door to abuse. If Spring really had been researching conspiracy theories and misinformation, she would have heard that claim repeatedly. Did she ignore it, or check, and simply report lies anyway?

The World Health Organization defines it in the following way:

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.

While there is a lot of garbage posted online (that part is true), isn’t it the job of a professional journalist to wade through, and sort out fact from fiction?

Listening to Spring talk, it does appear that she has much of an interest in fact checking anything that she calls a conspiracy theorist. She seems to take the Government narrative at face value.

In her own words, this is about “putting a human face” on trying to counter information the Government doesn’t like. This comes across as crass emotional manipulation.

Take a good look. This is the face of deception in the modern age.

(1) https://twitter.com/mariannaspring
(2) https://twitter.com/mariannaspring/status/1396858528900567041
(3) https://twitter.com/mariannaspring/status/1396859428226441225
(4) https://www.linkedin.com/in/marianna-spring-279439b6/
(5) https://archive.is/aL3iN
(6) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
(7) https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/annual-reports
(8) https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/funding
(9) https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/support-us/current-partnerships
(10) https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-57051691
(11) https://inews.co.uk/news/technology/social-media-boycott-football-sport-bbc-marianna-spring-dealing-with-trolls-978728
(12) https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct2dmc
(13) https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/events-archive/
(14) https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/events-archive/2005_atlantic_storm/atlantic-storm-BBC
(15) https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
(16) https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf?ua=1
(17) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVNlI0ewkBk

Category: UN/WHO

CV #25(F): Ottawa Launching Vaccine Passports At Instigation Of WHO-IHR, 7th Meeting

Like this:

(Charity) McMaster University; Bill Gates; Future Of Canada Project; Nexus For Infectious Diseases

Like this:

BC Centre For Disease Control Foundation Is Registered Charity, With Pharma Funding

Like this:

Twenty Twenty-One Is Now Available

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: