Category: Wars

Posted on

CPSBC Confirms No Jurisdiction To Handle Complaints Against “Public Health” Officials

In a response that should surprise no one, the CPSBC, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, has said that it has no jurisdiction to handle complaints lodged against any of its members, as long as they are acting in a “public health” capacity.

Bonnie Henry Complaint CPSBC

For some context, the typical doctor can be fined, suspended, or even lose their licenses altogether, depending on the circumstances. But doctors working as public health officials — and whose decisions impact everyone — cannot be held liable.

Of course, given that these people are appointed by politicians, there is an inherent conflict of interest. They aren’t going to be too critical of political decisions. In fact, these “top doctors” provide a level of cover for their bosses.

Then again, the CPSBC doesn’t seem to take complaints against its members too seriously, as shown in some of their recent decisions.

For more on what’s really going on in Canada, check out the CV series, and the one on health in Canada.

(1) https://www.cpsbc.ca/
(2) https://www.cpsbc.ca/about-us/annual-report
(3) https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/pdf/2020-21-AR-Disciplinary-Outcomes.pdf

Posted on

CV #26(H): Region Of Peel Lies About Infertility, Deaths, Approval

Let’s do a little math here: a normal pregnancy is 9 months.

These so-called “vaccines” started being injected back in December 2020, and this tweet comes in June 2021. That is about 6 months difference. By this logic, there wouldn’t have been enough time for women to have taken this “concoction”, gotten pregnant, and then had full term pregnancies.

Also, the quote, “millions of people including pregnant women” seems nonsensical. Who else gives birth?

Even if there had been some, Peel Health lies by omission by not mentioning the miscarriages or unintended abortions that have resulted from drug.

Like so many jurisdictions, Peel dishonestly conflates “dying with” and “dying from”. Setting aside the fact that this so-called virus has never been isolated, this is extremely dishonest.

Peel deliberately misrepresents the status of these “vaccines”. Currently, they have interim authorization under an emergency order, but are not approved. This cannot be a mistake in wording.

These people are not to be trusted.

(1) https://twitter.com/regionofpeel/status/1408789646046281730
(2) https://twitter.com/regionofpeel/status/1408365853360357379
(3) https://twitter.com/TOPublicHealth/status/1275888390060285967
(4) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/page-8.html#h-234517
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/interim-order-import-sale-advertising-drugs.html#a2.3
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(7) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/janssen-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(8) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-pm-en.pdf
(9) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-pm1-en.pdf

Posted on

Ron DeSantis “Vaccine Passport Ban” Leaves EHP Act, Forced Vaccinations, Curfews Intact

Amendment To Original
It seems that many of these powers were already in place from 2002, and then Governor Jeb Bush. However, the vaccine passport ban left these intact. SB 1262, the Emergency Health Powers Act, was passed in the hysteria of terrorism, which the media helped perpetuate. It was (in error), attributed to DeSantis. Instead, he appears to have just left them in place.

There is a separate piece of legislation, SB 6003, to strike “vaccination” out. We’ll have to see how it goes.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is frequently hailed as a freedom lover, and a pushback to tyranny in the area. But is that really true? How strong is his resistance?

At no point does DeSantis condemn or criticize these experimental concoctions. He never states that they are not approved, but only allowed because of an FDA Emergency Use Authorization. He never talks about the manufacturers being indemnified from liability.

Granted, he issued a blanket pardon for all of the illegitimate fines and charges handed down for breaching previous draconian Orders, but they should never have been issued in the first place.

For starters, while local officials may be prohibited from imposing mask mandates, there is nothing stopping private businesses from demanding them, even for essential goods.

Recently, DeSantis signed SB 2006, which the media claimed would ban “vaccine passports”. While that is true, there were many poison pills left from the Bush era. Either the Governor didn’t fully read the existing Act, or he just didn’t care.

Specifically, still allows the right of the State to impose quarantine measures, similar to what the International Health Regulations call for. It also allows for forced vaccinations. That’s right, a provision was put in to allow for MANDATORY vaccinations “or other treatments”. SB 6003 is in the works to strip vaccination out, but so far, has not been passed.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/2006/BillText/er/HTML is the link, and it seems to be down. So is the general site. Thankfully, it has been archived.

1056 (d) The State Health Officer, upon declaration of a public
1057 health emergency, may take actions that are necessary to protect
1058 the public health. Such actions include, but are not limited to:
1059 1. Directing manufacturers of prescription drugs or over
1060 the-counter drugs who are permitted under chapter 499 and
1061 wholesalers of prescription drugs located in this state who are
1062 permitted under chapter 499 to give priority to the shipping of
1063 specified drugs to pharmacies and health care providers within
1064 geographic areas that have been identified by the State Health
1065 Officer. The State Health Officer must identify the drugs to be
1066 shipped. Manufacturers and wholesalers located in the state must
1067 respond to the State Health Officer’s priority shipping
1068 directive before shipping the specified drugs.
1069 2. Notwithstanding chapters 465 and 499 and rules adopted
1070 thereunder, directing pharmacists employed by the department to
1071 compound bulk prescription drugs and provide these bulk
1072 prescription drugs to physicians and nurses of county health
1073 departments or any qualified person authorized by the State
1074 Health Officer for administration to persons as part of a
1075 prophylactic or treatment regimen.
1076 3. Notwithstanding s. 456.036, temporarily reactivating the
1077 inactive license of the following health care practitioners,
1078 when such practitioners are needed to respond to the public
1079 health emergency: physicians licensed under chapter 458 or
1080 chapter 459; physician assistants licensed under chapter 458 or
1081 chapter 459; licensed practical nurses, registered nurses, and
1082 advanced practice registered nurses licensed under part I of
1083 chapter 464; respiratory therapists licensed under part V of
1084 chapter 468; and emergency medical technicians and paramedics
1085 certified under part III of chapter 401. Only those health care
1086 practitioners specified in this paragraph who possess an
1087 unencumbered inactive license and who request that such license
1088 be reactivated are eligible for reactivation. An inactive
1089 license that is reactivated under this paragraph shall return to
1090 inactive status when the public health emergency ends or before
1091 the end of the public health emergency if the State Health
1092 Officer determines that the health care practitioner is no
1093 longer needed to provide services during the public health
1094 emergency. Such licenses may only be reactivated for a period
1095 not to exceed 90 days without meeting the requirements of s.
1096 456.036 or chapter 401, as applicable.
1097 4. Ordering an individual to be examined, tested,
1098 vaccinated, treated, isolated, or quarantined for communicable
1099 diseases that have significant morbidity or mortality and
1100 present a severe danger to public health. Individuals who are
1101 unable or unwilling to be examined, tested, vaccinated, or
1102 treated for reasons of health, religion, or conscience may be
1103 subjected to isolation or quarantine.
1104 a. Examination, testing, vaccination, or treatment may be
1105 performed by any qualified person authorized by the State Health
1106 Officer.
1107 b. If the individual poses a danger to the public health,
1108 the State Health Officer may subject the individual to isolation
1109 or quarantine. If there is no practical method to isolate or
1110 quarantine the individual, the State Health Officer may use any
1111 means necessary to vaccinate or treat the individual.
1112 c. Any order of the State Health Officer given to
1113 effectuate this paragraph is shall be immediately enforceable by
1114 a law enforcement officer under s. 381.0012.
1115 (e)(2) Individuals who assist the State Health Officer at
1116 his or her request on a volunteer basis during a public health
1117 emergency are entitled to the benefits specified in s.
1118 110.504(2), (3), (4), and (5).
1119 Section 18. Section 381.00316, Florida Statutes, is created
1120 to read:
1121 381.00316 COVID-19 vaccine documentation.—
1122 (1) A business entity, as defined in s. 768.38 to include
1123 any business operating in this state, may not require patrons or
1124 customers to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19
1125 vaccination or post-infection recovery to gain access to, entry
1126 upon, or service from the business operations in this state.
1127 This subsection does not otherwise restrict businesses from
1128 instituting screening protocols consistent with authoritative or
1129 controlling government-issued guidance to protect public health.
1130 (2) A governmental entity as defined in s. 768.38 may not
1131 require persons to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19
1132 vaccination or post-infection recovery to gain access to, entry
1133 upon, or service from the governmental entity’s operations in
1134 this state. This subsection does not otherwise restrict
1135 governmental entities from instituting screening protocols
1136 consistent with authoritative or controlling government-issued
1137 guidance to protect public health.
1138 (3) An educational institution as defined in s. 768.38 may
1139 not require students or residents to provide any documentation
1140 certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-infection recovery for
1141 attendance or enrollment, or to gain access to, entry upon, or
1142 service from such educational institution in this state. This
1143 subsection does not otherwise restrict educational institutions
1144 from instituting screening protocols consistent with
1145 authoritative or controlling government-issued guidance to
1146 protect public health.
1147 (4) The department may impose a fine not to exceed $5,000
1148 per violation.
1149 (5) This section does not apply to a health care provider
1150 as defined in s. 768.38; a service provider licensed or
1151 certified under s. 393.17, part III of chapter 401, or part IV
1152 of chapter 468; or a provider with an active health care clinic
1153 exemption under s. 400.9935.
1154 (6) The department may adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536
1155 and 120.54 to implement this section.
1156 Section 19. Subsection (1) of section 406.11, Florida
1157 Statutes, is amended, and paragraph (c) is added to subsection
1158 (2) of that section, to read:
1159 406.11 Examinations, investigations, and autopsies.—
1160 (1) In any of the following circumstances involving the
1161 death of a human being, the medical examiner of the district in
1162 which the death occurred or the body was found shall determine
1163 the cause of death and certify the death and shall, for that
1164 purpose, make or perform have performed such examinations,
1165 investigations, and autopsies as he or she deems shall deem
1166 necessary or as shall be requested by the state attorney:
1167 (a) When any person dies in this the state:
1168 1. Of criminal violence.
1169 2. By accident.
1170 3. By suicide.
1171 4. Suddenly, when in apparent good health.
1172 5. Unattended by a practicing physician or other recognized
1173 practitioner.
1174 6. In any prison or penal institution.
1175 7. In police custody.
1176 8. In any suspicious or unusual circumstance.
1177 9. By criminal abortion.
1178 10. By poison.
1179 11. By disease constituting a threat to public health.
1180 12. By disease, injury, or toxic agent resulting from
1181 employment.
1182 (b) When a dead body is brought into this the state without
1183 proper medical certification.
1184 (c) When a body is to be cremated, dissected, or buried at
1185 sea.
1186 (2)
1187 (c) A district medical examiner shall assist the State
1188 Health Officer in identifying and reporting deaths upon a
1189 request by the State Health Officer under s. 381.00315.
1190 Section 20. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
1191 act, this act shall take effect July 1, 2021.

Included in this Bill, SB 2006, are the famous provisions to ban “vaccine passports”, and the text can be found on lines 1122 to 1147. As stated there is a $5,000 (maximum) penalty for breaching this. However, it is not a complete ban, and professions such as health care can still require it.

But that isn’t all. Starting on line 1097
1097 4. Ordering an individual to be examined, tested,
1098 vaccinated, treated, isolated, or quarantined for communicable
1099 diseases that have significant morbidity or mortality and
1100 present a severe danger to public health. Individuals who are
1101 unable or unwilling to be examined, tested, vaccinated, or
1102 treated for reasons of health, religion, or conscience may be
1103 subjected to isolation or quarantine.

A State Health Officer can order a person to be examined, tested, vaccinated, treated, isolated of quarantined for “communicable diseases”. People who refuse, even for valid exemptions, may be quarantined by force. That doesn’t exactly seem consistent with “freedom”. Why is it still there?

1107 b. If the individual poses a danger to the public health,
1108 the State Health Officer may subject the individual to isolation
1109 or quarantine. If there is no practical method to isolate or
1110 quarantine the individual, the State Health Officer may use any
1111 means necessary to vaccinate or treat the individual.

Line 1110 and 1110 state that the State Health Officer may use any means necessary to vaccinate, or otherwise “treat” an individual. What good is it to ban vaccine passports, when the underlying vaccination can still be imposed on a member of the public? What else is in there?

1029 (b) Before declaring a public health emergency, the State
1030 Health Officer shall, to the extent possible, consult with the
1031 Governor and shall notify the Chief of Domestic Security. The
1032 declaration of a public health emergency shall continue until
1033 the State Health Officer finds that the threat or danger has
1034 been dealt with to the extent that the emergency conditions no
1035 longer exist and he or she terminates the declaration. However,
1036 a declaration of a public health emergency may not continue for
1037 longer than 60 days unless the Governor concurs in the renewal
1038 of the declaration.

The State Health Official is an unelected bureaucrat, who has the power to just declare an emergency, and keep it going. Yes, the Governor needs to sign off on renewals past 60 days, but that doesn’t really fix the problem. And who runs Florida anyway, the Governor, or the State Health Officer?

124 specified format; requiring that orders issued by a
125 political subdivision which impose a curfew
126 restricting travel or movement allow persons to travel
127 during the curfew to and from their places of
128 employment; amending s. 377.703, F.S.

Don’t worry about more house arrest (sarcasm). In the event of a forced curfew, people would still be allowed to travel to their jobs. DeSantis won’t PREVENT areas from imposing one, but at least people will still be able to work.

Ron DeSantis is greatly admired in Canada. But is he really the freedom fighter that he claims to be? Why were all of these things left in?

(1) https://www.flsenate.gov/
(2) https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/2006/BillText/er/HTML
(3) https://archive.is/XCFxp
(4) Wayback Machine Archive
(5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRFpYmBHzn0
(6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zeL0lVxXms
(7) https://aapsonline.org/press/jebbushlet.htm
(8) https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2002/04/state-public-health-emergency-bills-getting-favorable-reception

Posted on

Karlyn Borysenko Wants CRT Banned As Anti-White Agenda Is Too Obvious

On June 17, 2021, Karlyn Borysenko released a video, demanding that people stop calling critical race theory (CRT) an anti-white ideology. The entire video is well worth a watch. According to her biography, she is a “organizational psychologist and executive/performance coach.” Clearly, this is a smart person, which makes this claim so striking.

CRITICAL RACE THEORY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE

This doesn’t appear to be trolling. Borysenko it making the straight faced claim that this is the reality. Her major points are as follows:

  1. Borysenko claims that critical race theory isn’t about race, but about power. She says this is done to ultimate promote a communist utopia
  2. Borysenko claims that CRT makes people racist, despite previously statin that CRT isn’t about race. Some nice mental gymnastics
  3. Borysenko claims that CRT will create an actual white power movement in the United States.

Borysenko says that CRT came from the universities in the 1970s, and the idea is that racism exists everywhere. Consequently, it must be “sussed out”. While there is truth to this, she intentionally leaves out that the West has been continuously framed as a “white power” ideology, built on oppression. It doesn’t target any other group.

Also, the bulk of the people promoting the anti-white narrative aren’t white now, are they?

She repeats her contradictory claims that CRT is both: (a) not about race; and (b) can be used to target people of any race. How can an ideology that has nothing to do with race also be incredibly racist?

She claims that CRT can be directed against any group, including black and hispanic. Strange how there aren’t any claims of Mexican power in academia.

She also claims that an “actual white power movement” will result from pushing of CRT. Of course, she conflates violence with whites realizing that they are deliberately under attack. This attempt to steer the narrative has been done before, and she comes across as a less eloquent version of Jordan Peterson.

This dishonest take on CRT has an obvious interpretation: Borysenko doesn’t object to the anti-white agenda overall, but CRT is too overtly so. Can’t have the whites realizing that they are the targets. It’s a question of tactics here, not beliefs.

She makes the assertion that CRT is used to divide people while keeping a certain group in power. Okay, who’s in power? It probably isn’t whites, considering this is the only group it’s legal to discriminate against.

If Borysenko had simply condemned CRT, or claimed that things were being blown out of proportion, there would have been a lot less to question. However, she denies what is obvious, and claims that people organizing to resist it is an “actual white power movement”.

One has to wonder why she is being promoted as a “thought leader”, when many of the things she says are so obviously false.

Borysenko repeatedly makes strawman arguments. People calling CRT what it is are not trying to start any violent movement, they just want the truth told about this. However, she’s being intellectually dishonest when gaslighting such concerns.

Of course, if you start pointing out (with details) that CRT is anti-white, Borysenko has no problems blocking you. In fact, she seems to enjoy the idea of shutting out dissenting views. Her attitude and actions show that she has no interest in openly discussing what is obvious:

Critical race theory is anti-white, and used to condemn whites.

This isn’t just a one off. Borysenko’s YouTube channel is full of such content. On June 11, she did a stream on Robyn DiAngelo, author of “White Fragility”. DiAngelo isn’t white, but likes to condemn them anyway. Go through Borysenko’s work for more examples.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh0EMfjhqzM
(2) http://www.twitter.com/drkarlynb
(3) https://twitter.com/DrKarlynB/status/1406618460428378120
(4) http://facebook.com/drkarlynb
(5) https://www.linkedin.com/in/karlynborysenko/
(6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcZgVjM9K34
(7) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av2HN7e8n8Q
(8) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYTy6x7-5V8

Posted on

Aruna Khilanani, Anti-White Forensic Psychiatrist/Psychoanalyst, Doubles Down

Considering that Khilanani claims her words were taken out of context, it’s best to show the entire video here. She did a follow up interview after the initial talk.

On April 6, Aruna Khilanani, a forensic psychiatrist and psychoanalyst gave a talk at Yale University, where she spoke of violent fantasies about killing white people.

Statement from YSM
On April 6, a speaker who is not affiliated with Yale gave a Child Study Center Grand Rounds talk, with the provocative title “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind.” After the event, several faculty members expressed concern to the Yale School of Medicine’s Office of Academic and Professional Development and the Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion about the content of the talk.

Based on these concerns, School of Medicine leaders, including Dean Brown and Deputy Dean Latimore, in consultation with the Chair of the Child Study Center, reviewed a recording of the talk and found the tone and content antithetical to the values of the school. Because Grand Rounds are typically posted online after the event and in consideration of Yale’s commitment to the right of free expression, school leaders further reviewed the Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression at Yale.

In deciding whether to post the video, we weighed our grave concern about the extreme hostility, imagery of violence, and profanity expressed by the speaker against our commitment to freedom of expression. We ultimately decided to post the video with access limited to those who could have attended the talk — the members of the Yale community. To emphasize that the ideas expressed by the speaker conflict with the core values of Yale School of Medicine, we added the disclaimer: “This video contains profanity and imagery of violence. Yale School of Medicine expects the members of our community to speak respectfully to one another and to avoid the use of profanity as a matter of professionalism and acknowledgment of our common humanity. Yale School of Medicine does not condone imagery of violence or racism against any group.”

Instead of outright condemning this, Yale decided to post it, but limit the access of who could watch it. One can only imagine the outrage if the races had been reversed in this case. She now claims she was using metaphors, and wasn’t calling for overt violence.

Khilanani tries to spin this as some sort of social justice mindset, instead of overtly calling for violence. It comes across as incredibly condescending when she tries to “explain” it.

Khilanani has since doubled down, claiming both: (a) that she wasn’t quoted in full context; and (b) justifying how such views would be shaped. See the video at the top. She appeared on BNC news on June 16.

Apparently, white people got triggered (pardon the pun) for Khilanani saying that she fantasized about shooting whites in the head and walking away. She mocks whites for being offended by her words. Despite an initial impression, this woman doesn’t appear to be trolling. She seems to mean the anti-white hatred she spits out.

Also, if the West was built by whites oppressing and slaughtering others, is Khilanani not benefitting from this? Is she not enjoying a Western lifestyle created from the blood and bones of others? There’s no indication she’s about to abandon that life here and move elsewhere.

Treating everyone else just as people isn’t enough, in her mind.

This is racial hatred cloaked as psychological methods and research. Her choice of hosts for a “clarification” interview is interesting as well.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o20tk-QrZiE
(2) https://twitter.com/marclamonthill/status/1405491706842292225
(3) https://medicine.yale.edu/childstudy/education/rounds/
(4) https://yalecollege.yale.edu/get-know-yale-college/office-dean/reports/report-committee-freedom-expression-yale

Posted on

Bonnie Henry Lies Again: None Of These Vaccines Are “Approved” In Canada, AZ Isn’t Safe

What a lovely talk, if you turn off your brain. AstraZeneca is being pulled off the shelf in many countries because of the side effects, but it’s safe to use in Canada. The “approved” label sounds great, if you aren’t aware of the terminology.

(a) Approved: Health Canada has fully reviewed all the testing, and steps have been done, with the final determination that it can be used for the general population
(b) Interim Authorization: deemed to be “worth the risk” under the circumstances, doesn’t have to be fully tested. Allowed under Section 30.1 of the Canada Food & Drug Act. Commonly referred to as an emergency use authorization.

Now, looking at the front of the product information: are these approved, or are they given interim authorization under an emergency order? The 2 are quite different.

The push to have these experimental vaccines thrust on the public can be very easily explained. Just look at who politicians have been talking with. These are hardly the only examples.

Of course, this could be a rounabout way of admitting they aren’t safe. While “approved” vaccines may be safe, these are approved, and as such, aren’t included in the statements. And this lovely fellow is John Bell, the Head of AstraZeneca. He assures us that these are safe and effective.

So, why are these substances still being injected? It could have something to do with the rampant lobbying going on. Just putting the idea out there.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Mm3Os2QQ0
(2) https://ca.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-second-dose-good-choice-234058299.html
(3) WHO Paper On MANDATORY Vaccination April 13, 2021 (Copy)
(4) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/page-8.html#h-234517
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/interim-order-import-sale-advertising-drugs.html#a2.3
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(7) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/janssen-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(8) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-pm-en.pdf
(9) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-pm1-en.pdf