Recent Posts

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

“Tuition Payments” Are Really Just Charitable Contributions (Video Compilation)

Colleges and universities sell themselves as institutes of higher learning. In reality, they are corporations structured as charities. They are able to issue tax credits to donors and students.

Why do these schools push for masks and vaccine passports? Consider that the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and many drug companies donate as well. They give large amounts, and they do it regularly. Is it so difficult to believe that there might be some quid pro quo?

Schools are also instrumental in facilitating at least 1 stream of backdoor mass migration. This is done with the widespread issuance of student visas.

By the way, student loans are generally not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Guess not everyone can benefit from enriching the mind.

All of this would be common knowledge if the media wasn’t paid to deceive and mislead.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/some-of-the-gates-foundation-money-coming-into-canadian-universities/
(3) https://canucklaw.ca/bit-of-history-university-of-toronto-public-health-funded-with-rockefeller-money/
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/rockefeller-spends-13-5-million-to-combat-misinformation-in-u-s-elsewhere/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-mcmaster-university-bill-gates-future-of-canada-project-nexus-for-infectious-diseases/
(6) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-university-of-toronto-institute-for-pandemics-funded-by-millers-merck-run-by-ontario-science-table/

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS
(A.1) WHO International Health Regulations Legally Binding
(A.2) A Look At International Health Regulation Statements
(A.3) Quarantine Act Actually Written By WHO, IHR Changes
(A.3.2) Oversight For QA Proposals Removed, Slipped In Budget Bill
(A.4) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part I
(A.5) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part II
(A.6) World Health Treaty Proposed, Based On WHO-IHR

CHARITIES, PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA
(B.1) Public Health Agency Of Canada Created As WHO-IHR Outpost
(B.2) Health Canada Initially Created For Population Control Measures
(B.3) Robert Steiner Claims To Be Major PHAC Advisor To Liberals
(B.4) BC Provincial Health Services Authority A Private Corporation, Charity
(B.5) BCCDC Foundation A Registered Charity; Funded By Big Pharma
(B.6) Alberta Health Services: Mostly Autonomous Corporation, Charity
(B.7) Ontario Public Health An Autonomous Corporation, OST Ties
(B.8) Executives Of “Charity” Public Health Orgs. Paid Very Well
(B.9) Canada Public Health Association A Charity, Funded By Big Pharma
(B.10) University Of Toronto; Charity; Merck; Millers; OST
(B.11) McMaster University; Charity; Gates; Donations; Pandemic

(C.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(C.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(C.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(C.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(C.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(C.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(C.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(C.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(C.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money
(C.10) Gyms Getting Subsidized To Implement Masks, Vaxx Passes

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

Posted on

We’re Being Ruled By Charities (Video Compilation)

Most people (reasonably) assume that the institutions stripping rights away in the name of “infection control” are at least part of the Government. But is that really the case? Turns out, many “health authorities” are registered charities which receive millions each year from outside sources.

All of this information is freely available on the Canada Revenue Agency’s website. The C.R.A. is responsible for monitoring the finances of charities.

Side note: most colleges and universities in Canada are also structured as charities. Presumably, it makes it easier to attract donations, knowing that the public really pays for almost half. Of course, the University of Toronto — epicenter of the Ontario Science Table — is one as well.

All of this would be common knowledge if the media wasn’t paid to deceive and mislead.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS
(A.1) WHO International Health Regulations Legally Binding
(A.2) A Look At International Health Regulation Statements
(A.3) Quarantine Act Actually Written By WHO, IHR Changes
(A.3.2) Oversight For QA Proposals Removed, Slipped In Budget Bill
(A.4) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part I
(A.5) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part II
(A.6) World Health Treaty Proposed, Based On WHO-IHR

CHARITIES, PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA
(B.1) Public Health Agency Of Canada Created As WHO-IHR Outpost
(B.2) Health Canada Initially Created For Population Control Measures
(B.3) Robert Steiner Claims To Be Major PHAC Advisor To Liberals
(B.4) BC Provincial Health Services Authority A Private Corporation, Charity
(B.5) BCCDC Foundation A Registered Charity; Funded By Big Pharma
(B.6) Alberta Health Services: Mostly Autonomous Corporation, Charity
(B.7) Ontario Public Health An Autonomous Corporation, OST Ties
(B.8) Executives Of “Charity” Public Health Orgs. Paid Very Well
(B.9) Canada Public Health Association A Charity, Funded By Big Pharma
(B.10) University Of Toronto; Charity; Merck; Millers; OST
(B.11) McMaster University; Charity; Gates; Donations; Pandemic

(C.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(C.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(C.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(C.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(C.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(C.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(C.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(C.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(C.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money
(C.10) Gyms Getting Subsidized To Implement Masks, Vaxx Passes

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

Posted on

Great Barrington Declaration: Gatekeeping True Scale Of Medical Hoax

This is a long overdue piece. The so-called “Great Barrington Declaration” came about in late 2020. It was supposedly a call for “balanced” public health measures.

In reality, it still calls for significant limitations on freedoms. It plays along with the psy-op that there is some virus killing people at all. In short, it works to limit genuine discussion and curiosity on the subject.

It doesn’t really call for a return to normal lives. However, by “appearing” to call for a return to normalcy, it acts as just another voice working to suppress the full truth. Like with most controlled opposition, fact will be mixed with lies in order to obscure the big picture.

The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

This is the first of several red flags. The document doesn’t address the premeditation or deception behind these measures. Instead, they are criticized for being too heavy handed. There’s overwhelming evidence this was planned, and it’s easily available, even in October 2020.

And how concerned are they really? Epidemiologists and public health “scientists” are the ones pushing this warfare on the public. Perhaps there is some professional courtesy at play by not calling out the full scale of the lies going on.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

So, these “public health experts” are worried that lockdown measures will result in lower childhood vaccination rates for other things?! That’s an interesting approach. There’s no objection in principle to martial law being used on society, just the means that it’s being done.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

What about the so-called vaccine itself? What kind of irreparable harm will that cause? Is that something that needs discussing? And what “virus” would it be curing?

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

They claim that their knowledge is growing, but never address the elephant in the room: this “virus” has never been isolated or proven to exist in any scientific manner. It seems that none of them will touch the issue of germ theory being pseudo-science.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

Another warning sign: this call doesn’t address the complete lack of necessity for experimental vaccines. Instead, it’s referred to as just another measure. And immunity to what exactly?

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Again, the goal is to allow “some people” to live normal lives, but restricting the freedoms of others. They don’t ideologically object to martial law measures, just how they’re implemented.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

The Declaration quite clearly “does” support having freedoms removed, and having unelected bureaucrats make those decisions. And perform frequent tests for what? The nasal rape sticks can’t actually determine infection.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

Under the terms of the G.B.D., some people should be allowed to return to a normal life. This means that there is still support for reducing others’ freedoms indefinitely.

On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

While all of this sounds lovely on the surface, the G.B.D. gatekeeps real opposition by helping to gloss over the true scale of this hoax. It seems very doubtful that the people pushing this are unaware of what’s really going on.

Guess what else the G.B.D. doesn’t address? The fraudulent “definition” of a Covid death. This has been brought up on this site, but not many others. The people promoting G.B.D. talk about the science, but never the underlying deceit. There really is no other way to describe this “Declaration” as anything other than as a scam.

They also don’t seem interested in the myriad of businesses who’ve been paid to prop up the narrative via various subsidies. It doesn’t just happen in Canada.

(1) https://gbdeclaration.org/
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/a-death-resulting-from-a-clinically-compatible-illness/
(3) https://canucklaw.ca/following-the-bailout-money-video-compilation/
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/big-pharma-reviews/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/ontario-science-table-un-who-ihr/

Posted on

Rebel Media Sues C.R.A For Access To Trudeau Subsidies

Rebel Media (or Rebel News Network), recently announced the would be pursuing legal action against the Federal Government. This comes on the heel of being denied the status of QCJO, or Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization.

However, the context of the announcement comes across as somewhat misleading. The audience is being led to believe that Rebel is being censored, or that it will be shut down at some point. This is not the case. That’s not what denial of a QCJO designation means, but more on that in a bit.

Was there political bias in denying Rebel QCJO status? Perhaps, and they’re free to make that argument. That said, there’s more to it than that. They’re not being denied the right to practice journalism, but won’t be subsidized for doing so.

This isn’t a joke. Rebel really did take the Canada Revenue Agency to Federal Court in order to obtain their QCJO designation. The file number is T-720-22.

Why take the C.R.A. to Court? Most likely, it’s because that’s who manages the program, and the resulting subsidies. Receiving QCJO status means the outlet is entitled to tax incentives they otherwise wouldn’t be. This is probably the main reason the suit was filed in the first place.

For a group that rails against Trudeau funding the mainstream press, there’s certainly no shame in trying to cash in on some of those same perks.

To be designated as a qualified Canadian journalism organization (QCJO), an organization is required to meet the criteria set out in the Income Tax Act. For more information on these criteria, go to Guidance on income tax measures to support journalism.

An organization must first be designated as a QCJO to claim the Canadian journalism labour tax credit; potentially have their subscription costs be considered as qualifying subscription expenses for the digital news subscription tax credit; and/or apply for qualified donee status as a registered journalism organization.

If Rebel had gotten their QCJO designation, what would they be receiving?

(a) Canadian Journalism Labour Tax Credit: this would pay up to 25% of salaries of the business’ employees, which are typically the biggest expense
(b) Digital News Subscription Tax Credit: subscribers would receive a tax rebate of up to 15%
(c) Registered Journalism Organization Status: going the next step, QCJOs would be able to qualify as RJO as well, and start issuing tax receipts, similar to how charities operate.

Presumably, Rebel would also have been subjected to a much more favourable tax rate, and would be able to increase the deductions allowed annually.

Wild idea, but maybe this, and not censorship, is the real reason for taking the C.R.A. to Court. These benefits are substantial, and would add up over time.

Contrary to the impression many might have, getting registered with the C.R.A. isn’t common at all. As of the time of writing this, there are only 6 Registered Journalism Organizations:

  • La Presse Inc.
  • The Narwhal News Society
  • Presse-Ouest Ltée
  • Journaldesvoisins.com
  • New Canadian Media
  • The Local to Publishing

Of course, the bulk of the press in Canada is getting money from Ottawa under some program. That’s been covered elsewhere on this site.

Worth mentioning: True North also gets funding, all while claiming to be independent and free from the taint of Government money.

If anyone is worried about context, do read the Rebel posting, and watch the embedded video. This isn’t about the ability to report, or function as a media outlet. This is about access to taxpayer subsidies. Ezra himself admits that he wants to “level the playing field”. Apparently, having Government finance the media isn’t so abhorrent as to abstain from it on principle.

Quite simply, Rebel Media wants the same handouts that they mock others for receiving. That certainly puts things in perspective.

(1) https://www.rebelnews.com/rebel_news_is_suing_justin_trudeau
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b_1vwGrcY4&t
(3) https://archive.ph/beOQY
(4) https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/court-files#cont
(5) https://twitter.com/RebelNewsOnline/status/1512229529737211921
(6) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/business-tax-credits/canadian-journalism-labour-tax-credit/qualified-canadian-journalism-organization.html
(7) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/business-tax-credits/canadian-journalism-labour-tax-credit.html
(8) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/deductions-credits-expenses/digital-news-subscription.html
(9) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/business-tax-credits/canadian-journalism-labour-tax-credit/registered-journalism-organization.html
(10) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/list-charities/list-charities-other-qualified-donees.html
(11) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/other-organizations-that-issue-donation-receipts-qualified-donees/other-qualified-donees-listings/list-registered-journalism-organizations.html

Posted on

Action4Canada Case To Be Put Off Indefinitely

This is a follow-up to the Action4Canada lawsuit, filed in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver, back in August 2021. This comes after a year of begging and panhandling for money.

So, did the donors get their money’s worth? Not at all.

Far from being the work of legal experts, the final product was nearly 400 pages and extremely disjointed. It demanded millions of dollars, cited non-Canadian laws, demanded international remedies, went on tirades against non-parties, and was mostly comprised of irrelevant material. This Claim wasn’t just poorly done, but must have taken considerable effort to mangle in such a way. See the earlier review on exactly what was wrong with it.

As an extra layer of absurdity, the lawyers who wrote this piece of work have about 70 years of combined experience between them. This wasn’t done by Articling students or interns.

In a move that was entirely foreseeable, the Defendants filed Applications to strike out the Statement of Claim in its entirety. It’s also alleged that the Notices of Liability available to download were being used to harass public officials, and drive up donations.

The hearing was supposed to take place on February 3rd, concerning those Applications. It was expected to last most of a day.

That got pushed back to April 5th, due to an alleged serious illness from counsel.

However, that April 5th hearing never happened. According to the Court staff, the hearing has been postponed indefinitely. There is currently no date set down to review the Application. There’s also no indication or tentative date as to when things will progress.

It’s unclear why Lawrence Wong can’t represent the Plaintiffs for the Application. He is a B.C. lawyer, and was called to the Bar in 1987. Presumably he’s capable of handling this.

To avoid confusion here: this is just an attempt by the Attorney General and others to get the case tossed. It’s not a Trial, or any real progress in anti-lockdown challenges.

Also, striking pleadings is not the same as dismissing a case. Dismissing means terminating a case on its merits, while striking refers to serious defects with the documents themselves. Quite simply, the Attorney General’s argument is that the case is so convoluted, confusing, and incoherent, that it would be a waste of everyone’s time to go any further.

And they’re not wrong.

Is it difficult to meet the minimum threshold? Not really, as long as a few Rules of Civil Procedure are followed for all B.C. cases.

Rule 3-1 — Notice of Civil Claim
Notice of civil claim
(1) To start a proceeding under this Part, a person must file a notice of civil claim in Form 1.
.
Contents of notice of civil claim
(2) A notice of civil claim must do the following:
.
(a) set out a concise statement of the material facts giving rise to the claim;
(b) set out the relief sought by the plaintiff against each named defendant;
(c) set out a concise summary of the legal basis for the relief sought;
(d) set out the proposed place of trial;
(e) if the plaintiff sues or a defendant is sued in a representative capacity, show in what capacity the plaintiff sues or the defendant is sued;
(f) provide the data collection information required in the appendix to the form;
(g) otherwise comply with Rule 3-7.

Rule 3-7 — Pleadings Generally
Content of Pleadings
.
Pleading must not contain evidence
(1) A pleading must not contain the evidence by which the facts alleged in it are to be proved.
.
Documents and conversations
(2) The effect of any document or the purport of any conversation referred to in a pleading, if material, must be stated briefly and the precise words of the documents or conversation must not be stated, except insofar as those words are themselves material.
.
When presumed facts need not be pleaded
(3) A party need not plead a fact if
(a) the fact is presumed by law to be true, or
(b) the burden of disproving the fact lies on the other party.

This isn’t hard. Broadly speaking, a lawsuit must do 3 things:
[1] Briefly set out the facts as alleged
[2] Set out what remedies are being sought
[3] Briefly list what important laws will be relied on

Instead of following these simple rules, a 391 page mess was dropped on the Courts last year. Even someone researching for the last 2 years would have considerable difficulty following along.

Considering how badly this dumpster fire of a “Claim” was done, the response from the Defendants was inevitable. Why litigate a case when they can just get it struck out?

Rule 9-5 — Striking Pleadings
.
Scandalous, frivolous or vexatious matters
(1) At any stage of a proceeding, the court may order to be struck out or amended the whole or any part of a pleading, petition or other document on the ground that
.
(a) it discloses no reasonable claim or defence, as the case may be,
(b) it is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious,
(c) it may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial or hearing of the proceeding, or
(d) it is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court,
.
and the court may pronounce judgment or order the proceeding to be stayed or dismissed and may order the costs of the application to be paid as special costs.

This concept isn’t unique to B.C. Ontario has similar provisions with Rule 21 and 25.11, while the Federal Courts have Rule 221. They all amount to essentially the same thing.

And for clarity, the Government isn’t asking the case be thrown out because there are typos, mistakes, or that it’s sloppy overall. These kinds of cases are sent ahead all the time. No, the Application says that the Claim is so incomprehensible, rambling and scattered that it’s impossible to determine the case that must be made. They also allege that the Claim contains many, many pages which are completely irrelevant.

Again, they’re not wrong.

A cynic may wonder at this point if the goal is just to endlessly ask for extensions. That way, the Application to strike will never be heard, and the case will technically remain open. The donations can keep flowing in.

Let’s not kid ourselves here: this suit has no possibility of ever making it to Trial. There’s no amount of amendments or rewrites that will fix what’s wrong with it.

There have been rumours circulating since last Summer about Affidavits of evidence. Supposedly, these are several thousands of pages in length. This isn’t true at all. However, the statements may have been spread in order to placate nervous donors.

Any member of the public can call any Canadian Court — during business hours — and ask to see what documents are in a case. These Affidavits haven’t been filed for any of these suits, and it seems doubtful they exist at all.

Also: remember that July 6, 2020 case with Vaccine Choice Canada? This is the one where no Defences were ever filed, but no one ever sought Default Judgement. You don’t hear about that anymore, nor the one from October 2019. You don’t hear about the Police On Guard case either.

In other news, there has been an update with regards to Kulvinder Gill and Ashvinder Lamba. These are the doctors who tried to bankrupt 2 dozen people, mostly over mean words on Twitter. After their case was (predictably) dismissed as a SLAPP, the Defendants are alleging that they spent some $1.3 million obtaining that Judgement. While that sounds high, it works out to about $55,000 each, which is plausible. Anyhow, Notice of Appeal has been served, and it looks just as frivolous as the original Claim.

Interesting priorities. The Gill/Lamba case is being appealed, despite it being a matter between private parties, and having no outcome on the public. Meanwhile, anti-lockdown cases are dormant.

COURT DOCUMENTS
(1) A4C Notice of Civil Claim
(2) A4C Response October 14
(3) A4C Legal Action Update, October 14th 2021 Action4Canada
(4) A4C Notice of Application January 12
(5) A4C Notice of Application January 17
(6) A4C Affidavit
(7) A4C Response VIH-Providence January 17
(8) A4C Response to Application BC Ferries January 19

(9) Notice of Appeal and Appellants’ Certificate – Gill
(10) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2022/2022onsc1279/2022onsc1279.html

REVIEW
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/action4canada-statement-of-claim-fatally-defective-will-never-make-it-to-trial/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/delay-prevents-action4canada-case-from-being-immediately-thrown-out/
(C) https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/168_2009_00
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/vaccine-choice-canada-lawsuit-fatally-defective-will-never-make-it-to-trial/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/another-toronto-court-challenge-but-will-this-one-actually-go-anywhere/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/vcc-soc-ontario-redacted-october-24-2019.pdf

*Disclaimers, Ethics* Proudly powered by WordPress