Cops Fine Two Mennonites for Holding A Service Enforcing Ontario’s Anti-Christian, Anti-Family Medico-Stalinist Misnamed “Re-opening Ontario Act”

Police lay charges in weekend church gatherings with 100 alleged unmasked people

Mon., December 28, 2020, 1:25 p.m. EST·1 min read

Police lay charges in weekend church gatherings with 100 alleged unmasked people
Police lay charges in weekend church gatherings with 100 alleged unmasked people

WHEATLEY, Ont. — Police have laid charges after they say large gatherings were held two days in a row in a Wheatley, Ont., church this weekend.

Chatham-Kent Police say they found more than 100 people without masks inside the church at both times.

Police say a 50-year-old man from Merlin, Ont., was charged over the gathering at on Saturday at the Old Colony Mennonite Church .

They say another man from Merlin was charged over a gathering at the same church the next morning.

Both men were charged with failing to comply with the Reopening Ontario Act, which limits religious gatherings to 10 people indoors or outdoors during lockdown.

Ontario was placed under a province-wide lockdown on Saturday, which will remain in effect for 28 days in southern Ontario.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 28, 2020.

The Medico-Stalinist Tyranny in BC: Transit Cop Peter Kwok Arrests Mom With Medical Mask Exemption

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Officer arrests mom with medical mask exemption on Vancouver SkyTrain

On December 5, a British Columbian mother named Valerie Ann Foley was trying to take a TransLink SkyTrain to get home. She ended up being arrested, charged with assaulting a police officer, fined $460 and in need of medical attention for physical injuries she alleges were acquired during her arrest.

How did this happen, you might ask? If you can believe it, the entire nightmare began after Transit Police Officer Constable Peter Kwok ordered Ms. Foley to leave the train due to not wearing a mask, even though she clearly explained to him that she was medically exempt from wearing one. Kwok claimed that medical exemptions were no longer valid due to the provincial health order, yet both TransLink and the official Use of Face Coverings in Indoor Public Spaces (COVID-19) Order specify that there are in fact people who are medically exempt from wearing a mask.

The “new normal” that the government has mandated for British Columbians seems to be opening up the floodgates for people feeling entitled to discriminate against people who are medically exempt from wearing face coverings.

In a previous Rebel News report, we showed you how a human rights complaint was filed after The Hide Out Cafe in New Westminster refused service without accommodation to two people who claimed to have mask exemptions..

The issue is becoming so prevalent that Global News even reported that two different Chapter’s Indigo stores in the lower mainland refused indoor service to medically exempt individuals. One was a 12 year old autistic boy, and the other, a retired Canadian Paralympic swimmer named Elisabeth Walker-Young, who has no hands with which to put a mask on.

Rebel News is happy to offer Valerie Ann Foley a platform to tell her side of the story, and we have also taken on Foley as one of our newest Fight the Fines cases. We are not only helping her with free legal counsel to fight the fines she received, we’ve also assigned a sharp criminal defence lawyer to look into her charges as well.

If you want to help us fight the good fight by providing free legal counsel to Valerie Ann and more, please head to That’s where you can donate to help Valerie Ann and the hundreds of cases we’ve already taken on to help Canadians just like her. We appreciate your support.

Bravo for Ontario MPP Randy Hillier Defying the Ant-Family, Anti-Christian Medico-Stalinist Lockdown

Bravo for Ontario MPP Randy Hillier Defying the Ant-Family, Anti-Christian Medico-Stalinist Lockdown

MPP Randy Hillier posts a photo of 15 people in one room celebrating Christmas

By Neil McArtney Global News Posted December 28, 2020 7:07 pm

A photo posted by Independent MPP Randy Hillier on his social media feeds.
A photo posted by Independent MPP Randy Hillier on his social media feeds. Courtesy: Randy Hillier

Independent MPP Randy Hillier appears to be at it again – defying provincial COVID-19 guidelines.

Hillier, whose represents the riding of Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington, posted a picture of a Christmas gathering on his social media feeds.

A photo posted by Independent MPP Randy Hillier on his social media feeds.
A photo posted by Independent MPP Randy Hillier on his social media feeds. Courtesy: Randy Hillier

The behavior in the post appears to be in defiance of the province’s recent lockdown and enforced public health protocols. Story continues below advertisement

According to Hillier, the photo was taken on Sunday and showed 15 people around a table, celebrating a holiday meal.

Read more: MPP Randy Hillier says son tasered by OPP outside Perth, Ont., pub

A gathering of that size is in direct violation of lockdown guidelines set out by the Ford government.

[ Sign up for our Health IQ newsletter for the latest coronavirus updates ]

The number of people allowed to gather indoors is restricted to “only” members of a family living in the same household.

“The lies and deceptions of COVID are over. How and why so many allowed themselves to be deceived will take years to uncover. But I and many other Canadians will not accept the deception any longer. We are free and will defend our freedom,” wrote Hillier on Twitter.

Story continues below advertisement

The public was quick to react to Hillier’s posts on social media.

“It’s over? Dozens are dying daily,” wrote one person.

Another called for Hillier to resign.


Many are supporting Hillier on Facebook, however. At this point, it is unclear if charges will be laid.

Hillier did not immediately respond to Global News’ request for comment.

The Abandonment of Truth and the Fall of Civilization

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Thursday, December 17, 2020

The Abandonment of Truth and the Fall of Civilization

Exactly when Medieval times or the Middle Ages ended and the Modern Age began has long been a subject of discussion and debate.   It will continue to be so, since the transition was not instantaneous but took place over an extended period that included any number of events which, depending the criteria being taken into consideration, could be identified as the turning point.   The question must, therefore, remain open, and for several decades now has taken the backseat to the questions of whether the Modern Age has ended, if so when, and what comes next.      Despite the temptation created by so many of the events of the current year having been presented to us in an apocalyptic framework, it is not my intention to address the latter set of questions here, other than to refer my readers to the interesting and persuasive discussion of such matters by the late John Lukacs in The Passing of the Modern Age (1970), The End of the Twentieth Century and the End of the Modern Age (1993), and At The End of an Age (2002).    It is the transformation of Christendom into Western Civilization, a matter that touches on the questions pertaining to both the beginning and the end of the Modern Age that I shall be talking about here.    Or, to be more precise, I shall be discussing one aspect of that transformation.

Was the transformation of Christendom into Western Civilization the start of the Modern Age (one of the possible answers to the first question), the end of the Modern Age in both the sense of the purpose towards which that Age was directed and moving and in the sense that when it was accomplished the Age came to an end (if so this touches on the answer to all of the questions pertaining to the end of the Age), or was it simply one and the same with the Modern Age?

Christendom is a word that can be used in a narrower or a wider sense.   Let us take it here in its fullest sense of civilization that takes the Christian faith as its foundation and organizational principle.   It is essentially the generic version of what American Russian Orthodox hieromonk, Fr. Seraphim Rose, described in its Eastern Orthodox form when he wrote “that the principal form government took in union with Christian Truth was the Orthodox Christian Empire, wherein sovereignty was vested in a Monarch, and authority proceeded from him downwards through a hierarchical social structure” (Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age, 1994, 2018, p. 28).    Obviously, by the end of the Second World War, one of the time-markers for possible ends of the Modern Age, this had been replaced by liberal, secular, democratic, Western Civilization, in all but the most outward, nominal, sense.   At the deepest level, of course, the transformation had been accomplished much earlier than this.

What this suggests, of course, is that, paradoxically, all three options in the complex question in our second paragraph can be answered in the affirmative.

While the question of when exactly the transformation of Christendom into Western Civilization began must remain open, like the related question of when the transition into the Modern Age began, it is certain that the radical epistemic revolution belongs to the earliest stages of the transformation.   By radical epistemic revolution, I mean the fundamental shift in how we conceive of what we know and how we know it that involved a repudiation of both tradition and divine revelation as evidentiary paths to knowledge and which introduced so drastic a change in the meaning of both reason and science as to constitute a break from what these things had been since classical antiquity.     The consequence of this revolution for Christian Truth was that it was removed from the realm of knowledge and reassigned to the realm of a “faith” which had itself been radically redefined so as to bear no resemblance to St. Paul’s “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1) but to be almost the very opposite of this.   Clearly this was a most significant event in the breaking of the union between civilization and Christian Truth.

In my last essay, in which I talked about the increasing confusion with regards to basic logical concepts that has occurred in a period that has also seen dogmatic authority increasingly assigned to “science” despite this contradicting the non-authoritarian nature of science in both pre-Modern and Modern meanings, I mentioned the paradox of the fact that the removal of tradition and divine revelation from the realm of evidence which thus emptied that realm of all but the kind of evidence which historians and courts rely upon and the kind which scientists rely upon should have tipped the balance in favour of reason in the ancient debate about the priority of reason versus evidence but has seemingly had the opposite effect of elevating one particular form of evidence over reason and the other remaining form of evidence.   It also needs to be observed, with regards to the dogmatic, authoritative, voice now ascribed to “science”, that in the most obvious cases of this, actual empirical evidence has itself been trumped by something else.   In the anthropogenic global warming/climate change “crisis” of recent decades and the Wuhan bat flu “crisis” of this year, in both of which we have been told that we must accept a drastic reduction in human freedom and submit to totalitarian measures and group-think in order to avert a catastrophe, dissenters have been told to “shut up and listen to the science”, but the “science” in question has largely consisted of computer model projections, which have been granted a bizarre precedence not only over reason, such as the questioning which provokes the “shut up and listen to the science” response, and non-empirical evidence, such as the historical record on the world’s ever-changing climate which directly contradicts the entire alarmist narrative on this subject, but even empirical evidence as this has until recently been understood, observations and measurements made in either the real world or the laboratory.   Since plenty of this sort of empirical evidence joins non-empirical evidence in supporting reason against these narratives, we are in effect being told that we must set both reason and evidence aside and mindlessly obey orders backed only by the fictional speculations of an artificial “intelligence”.   Anyone still open to the evidence of tradition and divine revelation, will find in Scriptural descriptions of the effects of idolatry upon the minds of those who practice it, an ample explanation of this phenomenon.

That tradition and divine revelation became vulnerable to being forced out of the realm of evidence can in part by attributed to their having been set against each other in the period that produced the Reformation and Counter-Reformation.   Both sides share the blame here.   The papacy and its adherents at their worst placed such an emphasis on tradition that they sometimes gave the impression that they had elevated it over divine revelation and thus were inviting a response similar to that given to the scribes and Pharisees by the Lord in Matthew 15:1-2, emphasis on verses three and six, whereas the more radical elements of the Protestant Reformation went so far in the opposite direction as to contradict such New Testament affirmations of tradition as I Corinthians 11:2 and II Thessalonians 2:15 and 3:16.   It is beyond the scope of this essay, of course, to offer a full resolution of this conflict.   I shall simply point out that by divine revelation I mean what theologians call “special revelation”, which is distinct from “general revelation” such as that described by St. Paul in Romans  1:19-20.   General revelation or natural revelation, is God’s revelation of Himself in the natural order of His Creation, and is the source of such truth as can be found in all human tradition.   Special revelation, is God’s salvific revelation of Himself in His Covenants, His written Word, and ultimately in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ.   When Christianity makes claims of exclusivity, such as “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man cometh to the Father but through Me”, these rest upon special revelation.   When Christianity acknowledges truth in other religions, this is on the basis of the general revelation that informs all traditions.    See the essays by C. S. Lewis in the first section of God in the Dock (1970), and the book Christianity and Pluralism (1998, 2019), by Ron Dart and J. I. Packer for a more extended discussion of these matters.   Special revelation, because of its role in the ordu salutis, comes with promises of divine protection against corruption (Matthew 5:17-18, for example) that are obviously not extended to general revelation (see the larger context of the Romans passage cited above), which would seem obviously to place the primacy on special divine revelation, without eliminating the epistemic value of either human tradition in general or the particular Apostolic tradition affirmed in Scripture in the aforementioned Pauline references.

The turning of divine (special) revelation and tradition against each other facilitated the rise of rationalism which attacked their now divided house and excluded them both from the realm of reason, evidence, and knowledge.   That this having ultimately led to evidence taking primacy over reason in an ongoing discussion/debate which began prior to Socrates seems counterintuitive is due to the reasons mentioned above, however, it seems more inevitable when we consider what is asserted about Jesus Christ in the first verse of the Gospel according to St. John.   “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”    The word rendered Word in the English of this verse is Logos, the word from which logic is derived.   It does indeed mean “word” in the sense of the unit of speech that is the basic building block of sentences, although it can also mean “sentence” in certain contexts, or even “speech” in general.   It also, however, can mean thought, in the sense of calculation, judgement, evaluation, and basically everything suggested by the word “reason”.   This personification of reason and ascription to it of divine status would have been familiar territory to the Greek thinkers of the day, as just such a thought had long been a dominant theme in Greek philosophy.   

Heraclitus of Ephesus, who is otherwise best known for his view that constant change is the defining characteristic of the world – “you never step in the same river twice” – introduced the concept of the Logos into Greek thought.  Logos, to Heraclitus, was a divine, rational principle that governs the world of flux and brings order and meaning to what otherwise would be chaos. In the first century, the Hellenizing Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria, had famously equated the Logos of Greek thought with the personified Wisdom in Jewish Wisdom literature. The eighth chapter of the Book of Proverbs in the Old Testament is the canonical example of this personification of Wisdom, and the Wisdom of Solomon, one of the disputed books of the Septuagint, is a book long example of the same, possibly originally written as expansion of or commentary on the chapter in Proverbs.  Even prior to Philo there had been a tradition in Jewish thought somewhat parallel to the Greek Logos, represented primarily in the Targum (a translation, or more accurately number of translations, of the Old Testament into Aramaic, along with midrash or exegetical commentary on the same, also in Aramaic), in which the personified Memra acts as the messenger or agent of God.   

There was one huge difference between Philo’s synthesis of Greek and Hebrew thought on this matter and St. John’s.   For Philo the Logos was not God, per se, but a divine intermediary between God and Creation, roughly the equivalent of the Demiurge, albeit the benevolent Demiurge of Plato’s Timaeus not the malevolent Demiurge of the Gnostic heretics.   For St. John, the Logos was both with God, and was identical to God.    The lack of a definite article preceding Theos in the final clause of the first verse of the Gospel does not mean that a diminutive or lesser divinity is intended.   Since the clause joins two nouns of the same case (nominative) with the copula, and Theos is the noun that precedes the copula, its anarthrous condition indicates that it functions grammatically as the predicate rather than the subject (E. C. Colwell, “A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament”, Journal of Biblical Literature 52, 1933).   Even if this were not a recognized grammatical rule, St. John’s intention could hardly be clearer, as his Logos, identified in the fourteenth verse as Jesus Christ, repeatedly makes statements employing the Greek equivalent of YHWH in such a way as to unmistakably identify Himself as God.   Indeed, this makes St. John’s use of the Greek philosophical term for the divine principle of reason that makes reality orderly in a way that evokes the first chapter of Genesis with its repeated “and God said…and it was so”, transforming what had been “without form and void” into that which “was very good”, a much more powerful embrace of reason than Philo’s.    See Calvinist philosopher Gordon H. Clark’s The Johannine Logos (1972)for a fuller discussion of this.  This is why the rejection of Christian epistemology, which affirms both special revelation and tradition, and embrace of a rationalist epistemology that removes both from the realm of evidence – although done in the name of reason and hence the term “rationalist” – must inevitably assign reason a much lower place than it had occupied in a worldview that acknowledges the Divine Logos.

The elevation of empirical evidence over historical evidence was also an inevitable consequence of the same epistemological revolution.   The reason for this is that the special revelation and tradition which were banished from the realm of evidence, each have a unique relationship with one of the two evidences allowed to remain.   When special revelation and tradition were sent into exile, the hierarchical relationship between the two was also rejected, leading to the inversion of this hierarchy for the corresponding two evidences.

Empirical evidence or science – real empirical evidence, mind you, not the computer generated, pseudoscientific, fiction masquerading under its name today – corresponds with tradition.   Here, I mean tradition in the generic sense of “that which has been passed down” (tradition comes from the passive perfect participle of the Latin trado, the verb for handing over or passing on) rather than the content of any particular tradition.   Tradition’s chief epistemic value is that it is the means whereby that which has been observed, deduced, and otherwise learned and known in the past is made available to those living in the present so that each generation does not have to re-invent the wheel so to speak and discover everything afresh for itself.   Apart from this, human knowledge could not significantly accumulate and grow.   As mentioned briefly above, with regards to Romans 1, the truths of general or natural revelation which are passed down in tradition are susceptible to corruption, but it is also the case that living traditions are flexible and self-correcting.   That this, and not the rigid inflexibility that rationalists falsely attribute to it, is the nature of tradition, was an insight that was well articulated by Michael Oakeshott (see the title essay and “The Tower of Babel”, in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays, 1962).    While true science’s value is primarily utilitarian rather than epistemic – “science is always false, but it is often useful” as Gordon H. Clark put it – the merits of tradition as described in this paragraph overlap to a large degree those which scientists would ascribe to their vocation and methodology.   In the best sense of the word, science is itself a particular tradition, which has been accumulating natural knowledge and correcting itself since Thales of Miletus.

Special revelation, on the other hand, is connected to historical evidence.    This can clearly be seen in both Testaments.   The Old Testament is primarily the record of God’s revelation of Himself through a Covenant relationship established with a particular people, Israel, in a particular place, the Promised Land, over a specific era of time stretching from the period of the Patriarchs, from whom the people were descended, to the partial return from their exile in Babylon at the beginning of the Second Temple period.   Even the portions of it which are not strictly historical narrative in literary genre fit in to that history.   This is most obviously the case with the prophetic writings, which contain divine warnings given to Israel and sometimes the surrounding nations, in connection with events described in the historical record, but even in the case of the Psalms of David, many of these can be tied to specific events in that historical king’s life, as they collectively are tied to his life as a whole.

This is all the more the case with the New Testament.   The New Testament presents us with God’s ultimate revelation of Himself, both to the people with whom He had established the Old Covenant and promised a New, and to all the peoples of the world, in the Incarnation of His Son “and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us”.    The story of God’s Incarnational revelation is told in the form of history – events about specific people, in identifiable places, at identifiable times, attested to by witnesses.   We are told that the Virgin Birth, the event shortly to be commemorated at Christmas, occurred in the reign of Augustus Caesar, when Herod the Great was king of Judea, and Cyrenius was governor of Syria, and that it took place in the city of David, Bethlehem.    The baptism of Jesus by His cousin John the Baptist is the event that signaled the beginning of His public ministry.   We are told that John the Baptist’s own ministry began in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judeau, Herod Antipas was tetrarch of Galilee, and Annas and Caiaphas were high priests.   The locations of Jesus’ most significant miracles are identified, and the events of the final week of His public ministry are related in great historical detail – His dramatic entry into Jerusalem, His teaching in the Second Temple, His betrayal by Judas for thirty pieces of silver, His Last Passover Supper with His Apostles, His arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane, His first, illegal, trial before the aforementioned high priests and the Sanhedrin, His second, official, trial before the aforementioned Roman governor, the mob turning against Him, His torture by the Roman soldiers, His crucifixion between two thieves at the hill of Calvary, and His burial in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.    Real places, real people, real events.   As St. Paul would say to Festus a few years later, “the king (Agrippa) knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely, for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.”   The same St. Paul, writing to the Corinthians, would set forth the evidence for the crowning event of God’s Incarnational revelation of Himself in history, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, citing eyewitness after eyewitness.    The Resurrection is not something to which evidence of the empirical sort can speak, but the historical evidence for it is overwhelming. (1)  

In the Christian epistemic hierarchy special revelation which takes place in and through history ranks higher than tradition of which science at its best is a particular example.   The abandonment of Christian epistemology early in the transformation of Christendom into Western Civilization involved a repudiation of both special revelation and tradition as well as the ranking between the two.  Even though considered in themselves, a strong case could be made for the superiority of historical evidence over empirical evidence – the latter consists of observations made in artificially controlled situations to test hypotheses and so cannot be counted upon to have epistemic value, to speak truth about reality, things as they are in themselves, even when they have the utilitarian value of helping us to manipulate things to our own use, and so when it comes to determining truth about reality, the empirical must count as merely one form of testimony among the many that make up historical/legal evidence, as it is in standard courtroom practice, and is therefore logically subordinate to the larger whole of which it is a part – this has resulted in science being elevated over other forms of evidence, over tradition of which it is a particular example and thus logically subordinate to the general form, and over reason.    Science, which belongs at the bottom of the epistemic totem pole and is essentially magic that works (see C. S. Lewis’ “The Abolition of Man”, the third lecture/essay in the book of the same title), has been raised to the very top of the pole.  

This elevation of science over all other evidence, all other traditions, and reason itself goes a long way to explaining how people who are scientists only in the sense that they speak the technical language of some branch of science or another have managed to substitute baseless predictions spat out by some machine for actual empirical evidence and ascribe to these the kind of authority that properly belongs to special revelation.   They have put this false science to the use of frightening people into giving up their basic rights and freedoms in exchange for protection against one Bogeyman or another and are thus laying waste to what little remains of the civilization that was once Christendom.    This demonstrates just how fundamental to civilization is its account of reality and truth.

(1)  In his essay “Myth Became Fact”, C. S. Lewis spoke of this historicity of the Christian story as the distinguishing point between it and pagan myths with similar elements, and thus described the significance of the Incarnation in this way: 

Now as myth transcends thought, incarnation transcends myth. The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the dying god, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens ‐ at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or where, to a historical person crucified (it is all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes derived more spiritual sustenance from myths they did not believe than from the religion they professed. To be truly Christian we must both assent to the historical fact and also receive the myth (fact though it has become) with the same imaginative embrace which we accord to all myths. The one is hardly more necessary than the other.

It was precisely this consideration, that the Christian message was a “true myth”, as put to him by J. R. R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson, which had brought Lewis to Christian faith.  His interpretation here, of the Incarnation transcending myth by presenting us with a “myth which is also a fact” comes after, of course, his explanation of the meaning and value of myth qua myth, for which explanation I refer you to the essay as a whole which can be found in God in the Dock.
Labels: C. S. Lewis, Fr. Seraphim Rose, Gordon H. Clark, Heraclitus, history, Hugo Dyson, J. I. Packer, J. R. R. Tolkien, John Lukacs, logic, Michael Oakeshott, Philo, Plato, Ron Dart, science, special revelation, tradition

If You Never Made It to Police State East Germany Under the STASI or North Korea, Welcome to the Medico-Stalinist Tyranny of Ontario: Gatherings in YOUR Home Banned; Churches & Most Businesses Closed. The “Reopening Ontario Act” is a scam — It’s About Shutting it Down!

If You Never Made It to Police State East Germany Under the STASI or North Korea, Welcome to the Medico-Stalinist Tyranny of Ontario: Gatherings in YOUR Home Banned; Churches & Most Businesses Closed

Here are the fines people could face for violating Ontario’s coronavirus shutdown laws Ontario entered a provincewide shutdown on Saturday in a bid to slow the spread of COVID-19. It’s the second lockdown for the province since the pandemic began, with the first widespread measures having been in place during the spring. targeting social gatherings and businesses are among measures implemented as part of the shutdown.

A list of the restrictions currently enforceable throughout Ontario by provincial law are detailed under this section of Reopening Ontario Act, a spokesperson from the solicitor general’s office said. Among them are:

A ban on indoor social gatherings with anyone outside of your household. There is an exception for a person who lives alone and visits a second household.

A ban on outdoor social gatherings of more than 10 people.

The closure or limitation on operations of some businesses, including the closure of personal care services, limitation on retail sales, and restricting restaurants and bars to take-out, delivery, or drive-thru services only.

The restrictions are expected to be locally adjusted as regions move out of lockdown next month and the province moves back to its colour-coded response framework.

Depending on the violation of an emergency order and the discretion of an officer who observes an offence, the type of charge laid as well as the resulting fine can vary.

In general, anyone who violates an emergency order could face a fine of $750, while a person who obstructs someone exercising power or performing a duty in accordance with an order could face a fine of $1,000. Current Time 0:32/Duration 9:060Trudeau looks back on 2020: ‘Lots of things we learned that we could have done differently

However, a person who violates an emergency order could also be issued a summons in which the court would determine a penalty upon conviction, that could include a fine of up to $100,000 and a year in jail.

The province has also set up a minimum $10,000 fine for hosts or organizers of parties in violation of gathering laws.

Meanwhile, corporations which violate an emergency order could face a fine up to $10,000,000 upon conviction.

Fines could be increased even higher “by an amount equal to the financial benefit that was acquired.”

It’s important to note that municipalities may also impose additional restrictions beyond those implemented by the province, which could include additional fines.

Cops, Tools of the Medico-Stalinist Tyranny in Saskatchewan, Levy Huge Fines Against END THE LOCKDOWN Freedom Fighters

Saskatoon police announce eight more tickets after Dec. 19 ‘freedom rally’ protest

Police say they identified “key participants” in a demonstration in which more than 100 people gathered to protest public health measures.

More than 100 people gathered in Saskatoon's Kiwanis Park on Saturday, Dec. 19 for a "freedom rally" protesting against various restrictions put in place to combat the spread of COVID-19, including public health orders around wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes. (Matt Olson / Saskatoon StarPhoenix)
More than 100 people gathered in Saskatoon’s Kiwanis Park on Saturday, Dec. 19 for a “freedom rally” protesting against various restrictions put in place to combat the spread of COVID-19, including public health orders around wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes. Photo by Matt Olson / Saskatoon StarPhoen /Saskatoon StarPhoenix

Police say eight people face fines over their roles in a demonstration on Saturday in downtown Saskatoon.

The people charged with violating public health orders were identified as “key participants” in the Dec. 19 protest which saw more than 100 people gather at Kiwanis Memorial Park to protest mask wearing and other restrictions put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Four of them were not given the option to simply pay the $2,800 fine voluntarily, police said in a media release on Wednesday. Rather, police said those four will be required to make court appearances to answer to the charges, a decision that was made after consultation with prosecutors and public health officials.

The Saskatoon event was the third weekend in a row in which a large public anti-mask protest has taken place in the province. Saskatoon police previously issued a $2,800 ticket under the Public Health Act to a “key participant” in a Dec. 5 protest in Saskatoon. Regina police issued two similar fines following a rally in that city on Dec. 12.

Police said Wednesday’s announcement brings the total number of tickets written in Saskatoon for failing to comply with public health orders to 15.

A police spokeswoman said the four individuals required to come to court for their matters were scheduled to appear on March 23 in Saskatoon Traffic Court. 9 (Saskatoon Star Phoenix, December 24 , 2020)

Attend the END THE LOCKDOWN Rallies in Kelowna, Vernon or Penticton, Boxing Day, December 26, 2020


Attend the END THE LOCKDOWN Rallies in Kelowna, Vernon or Penticton, Boxing Day, December 26, 2020

————————Confidence is rooted in understanding. Fear is based on the unknown.

Kelowna. Our awesome Kelowna rallies continuing with rally,. Saturday, December 26. 12:00 . Stuart Park

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance

BRING YOUR OWN SIGNS FOR ALL RALLIES! Everyone is urged to show up and display our opposition and refusal to comply with Unconstitutional Orders.

We need as many people as possible for these rallies!If you have been unable to make it out to previous rallies, NOW is the time to come out!!!!

The Real New Normal from now on, is: Live normally and just say NO!

Bring at least two friends!

Vernon Saturday, December 26th -meet at Polson Park at noon (please be on time)-meet at the bandshell for announcements and speeches, then proceed to the intersection near the fountain afterward.

•bring your sign (wehaveextras fornewcomers and guests)

•bring pots and pans, bells, or other noisemakers (please -no airhorns!)

•dress warmly

•bring a friend, or two, or three

•bring your smiles and joyful energy, get ready to sing!

•freedom music encouraged for out on the street -bring your Bluetoothand your playlist

•bring cash for donations to help pay for rally costs (signs, copying, etc.


Penticton Warren St. across from Cherry LaneMall12:00 noon