Unfortunately, due to
the recent orders by the B.C. Gov’t, including Bonnie Henry and Mike Farnworth, our planned November
29, 2020 CLEAR opening has been postponed until January. This was brought to our
attention on Tuesday.
We are looking at all possible options right now and hope to be able to re-schedule this important event and
presentation as soon as possible. If you have informed anyone of our event, please let them
know of this postponement.
We are truly sorry for any inconvenience this may have
caused. Fortunately, the organization in
charge of the building we were going to use, is taking serious pro-active
actions against the gov’t in relation to what has happened. However, a decision was made by the organization
to postpone our opening to accommodate the actions that they are
planning.
I understand and respect their position, and courage to
challenge the Government on these issues, and we need to remember the blame
lies fully and completely with Bonnie Henry and the B.C. Government, none of us
personally. It our hope to be able to offer this presentation and event shortly.
If you have any questions or comments, please email me at: clear2012@pm.me.
Thank
you to everyone for your patience and understanding. If anything, this
should strengthen our resolve to refuse to comply.
Our rallies throughout the Okanagan will continue every Saturday in Vernon, Kelowna and Penticton as part of our
ongoing opposition to theGovernment actions as well. More details in our next email update on Thursday.
Salon owner facing £27,000 fine after quoting Magna Carta to defy lockdown
A salon owner who refused to close during England’s current lockdown has been given a £27,000 fine. Sinead Quinn, who runs Quin Blakey Hairdressers, was initially fined £1,000 for staying open after November 5.
She stayed open and further fines were issued. She tried to use the Magna Carta as a defence of her decision to stay open. However, the law she cited – Clause 61, offering 25 barons the right to lawfully dissent or rebel if they thought they were being governed unjustly – was repealed and never incorporated into English law.
Kirklees Council ordered her to pay £4,000 on Saturday and police issued another two £10,000 fines when she opened again on Monday and Tuesday.
Quinn had previously shared videos of herself arguing with council officials and police on Instagram. In one clip she could be seen telling them she didn’t consent to the ‘unlawful’ fines, and cited ‘common law’ in her defence. On Tuesday Quinn shared a picture of a police car outside the salon and captioned it: ‘This is what your tax paying money goes toward. Sitting outside my business whilst I’m lawfully earning a living.’ In another video she accused the police of ‘stalking’ her.
Hairdresser Sinead Quinn She previously put the Magna Carta up in the salon’s door (Picture: Instagram) Police fine the salon Officers have visited the salon twice this week (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS)
Kirklees is currently among the most infected areas in England, with a rate of 446.4 cases per 100,000 people in the seven days to November 19. The council said in a statement: ‘It is absolutely crucial for people’s safety that we all follow the latest Covid-19 rules and guidance. ‘Kirklees currently has the fifth highest rates in the country, with 135 people admitted to hospital last week and 25 sadly losing their lives to a Covid-19 related death.
The salon sign The Magna Carta can not be used as a defence in court (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS) Quinn Blakey Hairdressing, on Bradford Road, Oakenshaw is visited by two PCSOs as they appeared to be staying open in defiance of lockdown restrictiond, November 10 2020. See SWNS story SWLEhair.
A hair salon appears to have rebelled against the current lockdown rules by staying open despite the tightened coronavirus restrictions. Quinn Blakey Hairdressing, on Bradford Road, Oakenshaw, was seemingly open for business yesterday and at one point, police community support officers arrived at the premises.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson ordered certain businesses – including hairdressers – to close from November 5 in the face of rising Covid-19 cases. On the same day, a post on the salon?s Facebook page said: ?I earned this week?s rent today, not sure where I would be pulling that money from given the government want self employed business people to wait SIX WEEKS for a payment. She has received £27,000 in fines (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS)
‘The law set by the Government is there so we can bring infection rates down, ease pressure on our health services and save lives. ‘But it only works if we all stick to it and realise that no one is above the law. Frankly, the actions taken by this business are selfish and irresponsible. ‘We will not hesitate to take action on anyone who breaches the rules that are in place to keep us all safe. Repeated breaches of Covid-19 regulations result in ever increasing fines up to £10,000 and eventually prosecution.’
Yesterday, a group of public figures, including authors, signed a letter in Harpers, effectively denouncing cancel culture.
They suggest that we are living in a
society where individuals cannot speak out or voice dissenting opinions
because they will face backlash, including being fired from their job, for voicing or giving a platform to controversial views. This is similar to a question employees raise with respect to their employer: can I be fired for what I post on my social media or opinions I express in my workplace?
In Ontario, the short answer is yes.
This answer may be surprising to many because the response I often receive from clients is, “what about my right to free speech?”. While free expression (which is broader than speech) is a Charter protected right, it does not provide the type of protection most people expect it to and is generally misunderstood. This blog attempts to clear up a few of the frequent misconceptions I hear about free expression in Canada and explain why an employer can discipline you for offensive comments.
Free expression (and all Charter rights) only applies to government actions that limit those rights.
Misconceptions about free expression
Free expression (and all Charter rights) only applies to government actions that limit those rights. In other words, if you work for a private corporation the Charter does not
apply to your employer’s actions. If you work for the government, then
you may have a right to express yourself; however even that has limits. So, unless you work for the government, you are not being denied a Charter right if you are fired for voicing an opinion.
Similarly, and contrary to the views of the authors of the Harper’s piece, even if free expression applies,
dissent to your opinions or even telling you to stop voicing those
opinions is not contrary to the principle of free expression. The
concept of free expression comes from the idea of a marketplace of
ideas. The marketplace of ideas is a capitalist concept that in a free
society we allow all ideas to come to a market, where they can be
debated and discussed. The superior ideas thrive and become accepted by society, while the inferior or offensive ideas are rejected.
To use pharmaceuticals as an analogy: when drug companies come to market with new products that help people, those products become widely used. When companies come to market with products that do not
work or hurt people, the market rejects those products. If the drug
company keeps coming back to the market with the same product that hurt
people, or releases one product that seriously harms people, Shoppers
Drug Mart will stop carrying that brand.
Free expression is meant to operate in the
same way. To take Jordan Peterson as an example, he has had numerous
opportunities to express his opinions, including as an author and
university professor. Most people rightfully called out his comments as
offensive and hurtful, stopped reading him, and when he continued to
voice those same opinions, eventually insisted that institutions refuse
to provide him a platform. While numerous people said this was
inconsistent with free expression, it was in fact the point of free
expression: the marketplace has rejected his ideas.
Free expression is not whack-a-mole, where JK Rowling and Jordan Peterson get to keep voicing the same transphobic comments without consequence and society has to keep bashing them with a hammer, despite what the authors of the Harpers letter said. Society can reject, shame and cancel that person for continuing to come to the market to insist that their harmful views be expressed.
In summary, free expression does not apply
to your employer (unless you work for the government) and does not
provide you with a platform to repeatedly voice harmful opinions.
Back to the main question: can I be fired?
In Ontario, you can be fired for almost anything, so the better question that you should ask is: can I be fired for just cause for voicing my opinion. The answer to that is maybe. Just cause is where your employer
terminates you without notice or compensation. Courts apply a highly
contextual approach, particularly for off-duty comments, to determine
whether you can be fired without compensation for what you say. It will
depend on the comments themselves, how often you commented, who you said
it to, whether the employer previously condemned the comments, the
impact the comments had on your employer, and a variety of other
factors.
It is difficult for an employer to convince a judge that it had just cause to terminate someone, so most just fire people without cause, by providing them with notice of termination with no reasons (see our other blogs about the amount of severance you might be entitled to here). In
other words, if your employer is concerned about opinions you have
voiced, and doesn’t want to fight about just cause, it can fire you by
paying you out and you would have no way to fight it. While there are
some exceptions to this (for example if you were voicing concerns
related to health and safety, human rights, or Employment Standards),
you generally have no way of challenging this.
This is particularly true because
employers are beginning to recognize that they must do more to address
racism and discrimination in the workforce. One of the ways they must do this is by immediately addressing harmful expression made both in and outside the workplace that hurts other staff or customers.
As such, if your employer fires you for voicing an opinion, there is very little you can do the challenge that decision, unless they allege cause.
B.C. man faces strict conditions after breaching sentence for anti-Semitic hate crimes
Judge prohibits Arthur Topham from publicly posting about Jewish people, the Talmud, Zionism and Israel
Betsy Trumpener · CBC News · Posted: Nov 23, 2020 3:42 PM PT | Last Updated: November 23
Arthur
Topham enters the Quesnel, B.C., court house in 2015, where he was
convicted of willfully promoting hatred during a jury trial. (Betsy Trumpener/CBC)
A
B.C. man convicted of an online hate crime is facing strict new rules
on his public expression after breaching his sentencing conditions.
Arthur
Topham, who ran a publication from his rural home near the central
Interior city of Quesnel, was convicted in 2015 of communicating online
statements that wilfully promoted hatred against Jewish people.
As
part of his sentence, Topham was forbidden from publishing or publicly
posting information about “persons of Jewish religion or ethnic
origin.”
But In October, a provincial court judge ruled Topham had breached that condition by creating new posts throughout 2018.
Late
last week, the judge sentenced Topham to a 30-day conditional sentence
and three years probation for the breach, placing strict new conditions
on Topham’s public posts.
“Justice has been served,” the B’nai Brith’s Ran Ukashi. “There’s a price to pay for these kinds of actions. (B’nai Brith/Contributed)
For
the next three years, Topham is forbidden from publishing or printing
publicly any reference to or information about the Talmud, Zionism,
Israel, and the Jewish religion, ethnicity or people.
Topham is also forbidden from publicly posting the names of people he knows to be of Jewish origin.
According
to court documents, he will still be allowed to publicly name his wife
and her family, but not to mention their ethnicity or origin. During his
original trial, Topham told the court his wife is Jewish.
In
addition to the terms of his three-year probation, Topham will serve
a 30-day conditional sentence, with a nightly curfew and a requirement
to remain in B.C. He’s also prohibited from having weapons, liquor, or
alcohol.
“Justice
has been served,” said Ran Ukashi, National Director with B’nai Brith, a
Jewish advocacy group that’s been closely following the case.
“It serves as a deterrent for others, to realize there are consequences, there’s a price to pay,” said Ukashi.
Self-proclaimed
“white nationalist” Paul Fromm contributed to Arthur Topham’s defence
fund and travelled to Quesnel to attend Topham’s 2015 trial. (Betsy Trumpener/CBC)
“There
are limits to … free speech and promoting hatred against identifiable
groups is not on,” he said.”This person has been given opportunity after
opportunity to not behave this way.”
A retired teacher now in
his 70s, Topham was first charged in 2012. A website he produced
featured frequent posts with anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and
demonized Jewish people, according to evidence at his trial.
Arthur
Topham arrived at the Quesnel courthouse for sentencing on his hate
crime conviction in 2017. He’s since been convicted of breaching the
terms of his sentence. (Faith Fundal/CBC News)
At
his original trial in 2015, Topham’s lawyer argued the posts were
political satire, did not incite violence, and included materials that
could easily be ordered on Amazon.
Topham’s case was the first hate crime prosecution in B.C. in almost a decade.
It
drew support from the Ontario Civil Liberties Association, which
champions free speech, as well as from self-proclaimed “white
nationalists,” who attended Topham’s jury trial in the Quesnel
courthouse, 700 km northeast of Vancouver.
Paul Fromm helped to fund Topham’s defence and covered his trial through video blogs from Quesnel. Monika Schaefer, who served jail time in Germany for Holocaust denial, also attended court.
Euro ‘Anti-Hate’ Group Boss Discussed ‘Necessity’ of Killing Whites
Concern After European ‘Anti-Hate’ Group Boss Discussed ‘Necessity’ of Killing White People
PATRICIA DE MELO MOREIRA/AFP via Getty ImagesChris Tomlinson24 Nov 20204102:20
Mamadou
Ba, head of the Portuguese “anti-hate” group SOS Racismo, spoke of the
need to “kill the white man” at a recent online conference on “hate
speech”.
Ba,
a Portuguese citizen originally from Senegal, attended the conference
on Saturday which was on the topic of “Racism and the Advancement of
Hate Speech in the World”.
During
the conference, which was attended by Portuguese speakers from Portugal
and Brazil, Ba stated “it is necessary to kill the white man, murderer,
colonial, and racist” to “prevent the social death of the black
political subject”.
According to a report from Portuguese daily newspaper Correio da Manhã,
the statement was a quote from Algerian far-left anti-colonialist
political philosopher Frantz Fanon, who openly advocated for violence
during the French rule of Algeria in his seminal work The Wretched of the Earth.
The
newspaper states that it is not clear whether Ba was quoting the
far-left philosopher, but said it was presumed he did so in agreement.
“Refutation
is part of the proposition, but what matters most to combat hate speech
is to propose a new narrative,” Ba said during the online meeting.
Earlier
this year, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), which is
partnered with Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros’s Open
Society Foundations, called for support of SOS Rascimo, which it described as one of the “founding members” of the ENAR.
According
to the ENAR, Ba and other activists had been sent threats online, and
Ba himself had received a letter with a bullet casing inside it.
The
incident is not the first controversial moment for a so-called
“anti-hate” group in Europe, many of which have direct ties to both Open
Society Foundations and George Soros, such as Hope Not Hate in the UK
which was identified in a Swedish military report on far-left extremism in 2018.
In Germany, the anti-hate Amadeau Antonio Stiftung, headed by former Stasi informant Anetta Kahane, sparked controversy after releasing a guide for schools to spot “Nazi parents”.
Hanover minister fined twice for breaking pandemic rules
Written by Shannon Dueck
Tuesday, Nov 24, 11:42 AM
A minister in southeastern Manitoba has been issued two separate tickets for failing to comply with COVID-19 regulations.
Tobias Tissen is with Church of God, located off Highway 12, about
nine miles south of Steinbach. On Monday, he was visited by several RCMP
officers and provincial officers who issued him two tickets worth
$1,296 each. The visit was filmed by Tissen and shared on Facebook.
In the video, the officers identified that the first ticket was for
attending a large gathering. The gathering they are referring to is the
anti-mask protest held in Steinbach on November 14th. The second ticket
was for failing to comply with a public health emergency order under the
Public Health Act. This was with respect to the fact his church held a
service on November 22 with well over 100 people in attendance.
“I’m drawing very close similarities to the Gestapo in Germany. I’m
from Germany, my ancestors are from there,” says Tissen in the video.
“And what you are doing is very similar, enforcing laws that are making
the citizens vulnerable, losing sleep, making them stressful. And I pray
to God that one day all these unjust things will be straightened. And
I’m confident that it will.”
Meanwhile, the province today provided an update on enforcement
related to the protest held in Steinbach on November 14. To date, 16
tickets have been sworn and more are expected to receive tickets as the
investigation continues. One person who attended a subsequent event at
the Legislative Building in Winnipeg on November 21 was identified and
served with a ticket for their participation in the earlier event.
According to the province, enforcement officials are also
investigating the church service held over the weekend. It says, one
individual received a $1,296 ticket and more tickets for other
participants are expected as the investigation continues.
A Toronto restaurant is reopening for indoor dining to defy lockdown orders
Stay in the loop
Sign up for our free email newsletter. Unsubscribe anytime or contact us for details.
The owner of Toronto’s popular Adamson Barbecue restaurant is kicking up COVID-related controversy once again
this week in what might be his boldest (and riskiest) move to date:
Opening up for indoor dining while the region is under lockdown.
“Hello Adamson Barbecue fans!” said outspoken restaurateur Adam Skelly in a video posted to his brand’s Instagram account Monday evening.
“I’m coming on here today to let you guys know that our Etobicoke
location, tomorrow — that’s Tuesday — will be opening for in-restaurant
dining against provincial orders at eleven o’clock.”
Adamson Barbecue Etobicoke, which opened as the brand’s third location
earlier this fall, is expected to resume full operations today at 11:00
a.m. at 7 Queen Elizabeth Blvd., just off Royal York Road near the
Gardiner Expressway.
Any restaurant found to be in contravention of public health orders currently faces fines of up to $25,000 per day
from the municipal government alone. Individuals, such as Skelly, would
be personally liable for another $5,000 per day on top of that under
City rules.
Bolstered by the support of his fans, Skelly doesn’t seem to care.
“For those of you who have eyes to see why I’m doing this, thank you
guys so much. Thank you for the messages of support, thank you for
filling out my little polls, thank you for letting me know that we have
people in our corner,” he said in his Instagram dispatch Monday night.
“This is a risky move and you guys gave me the gas to do this, so I just want to thank you guys so much.”
Judging by the number of views on his video — more than 100,000 in
less than 24 hours — and the hundreds of comments, Skelly does indeed
have many supporters — as well as detractors.
The controversial businessman, who opened the first of his wildly-popular Texas-style BBQ joints in Leaside four years ago, explained in his video why he was taking such a bold stance.
“Top to bottom, this thing stinks — it reeks of corruption,” said
Skelly of the lockdown, noting that he didn’t have enough time to lay
out everything in detail.
“I’m going to start with just one point: We’re using PCR tests with a
cycle threshold of over 40 to drive hysteria around case counts,” he
continued.
“If you guys understand what’s going on with these PCR tests and
their cycle thresholds, you know that they’re picking up all sorts of
other stuff that’s not COVID — bacterial infections, other coronaviruses
including the common cold, fragments from the flu shot… If you know
that, then you know we’re going to be about 2.5 per cent positivity rate
until the end of spring.”
“How many businesses — how many people — are going to lose everything?” said Skelly. “Enough is enough.”
All “non-essential” businesses have been forced to close,
including many retail stores, bars, restaurants and gyms. Many of these
businesses were just barely hanging on as it is, and some won’t be able
to survive this second, indefinite clampdown. But if that’s not enough,
masks are now mandatory indoors, and a snitch line has been set up for
people to rat out anyone who plans to host a holiday gathering.
Since the start of the original lockdown in April, some 3,300
private mercenaries have been roaming the streets to dispense hundreds
of punitive COVID fines to anyone daring to oppose the oppressive
decrees handed down by Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister. And to think,
this man once claimed to be a conservative.
But we’ve had enough!
We’re putting out a call to all Manitobans: if you’ve
received one of these COVID fines, let us know, and we’ll help you fight
back!
To submit your case, please visit www.FightTheFines.com and
fill out the form on our site. We’ll review your case, and if it has
merit, we’ll help crowdfund a lawyer to help you fight it.
We’ve already scored legal victories in Canada and Australia, and we’ve even taken our campaign to the U.K.
And If you want to support our fight, please visit www.FightTheFines.com to chip in a donation.
With your help, we can take a stand against the tyrants running
our country who have stoked fear to seize power and rob Canadians of
their civil liberties.CoronavirusManitobaFight the FinesBig Government
German police barge into the house of anti-lockdown activist Dr Andreas Noack, arrest him during YouTube livestream: Watch video
A doctor in Germany, Dr. Andreas Noack, was arrested by the Police on Wednesday in what appears to be a gross violation of personal liberty. The reason for his arrest is not yet clear but he was arrested while live-streaming on YouTube from his own home. 20 November, 2020 OpIndia Staff
A doctor in Germany, Dr. Andreas Noack, was arrested by the Police on Wednesday in what appears to be a gross violation of personal liberty. The reason for his arrest is not yet clear but he was arrested while live-streaming on YouTube from his own home. The Police barged into his home when he was live on his YouTube channel.
The manner of his arrest presents some extremely disturbing scenes.
He appeared too shocked to respond while the Police continued to yell at
him until he lied down in the ground. The arrest of Dr. Andreas Noack
occurred after the passage of the ‘Infection Protection Law’ which was
protested heavily by vast sections of the German population. The
arrested doctor was supposedly providing medical assistance to
anti-lockdown protesters.
According to reports,
“The reasons for the police raid and arrest … have not yet been
officially revealed. However, there are rumors [unconfirmed reports]
that Dr. Andreas Noack provided medical assistance to hundreds of
protestors during lockdown protests against the German government.”
Reportedly, Dr. Andreas Noack was under investigation for “being
non-compliant with the COVID-19 lockdown laws enacted by the German
government.”
The ‘Infection Protection Law’ has drawn a lot of flak
and has been compared by some to the Nazi era Enabling Act. Like the
law that was passed in 1933, the recently passed law also confers
certain legislative powers to the government, which hitherto rested only
with the Legislature, that is, the Parliament. The Infection Protection
Law provides the government with a legal basis to restrict the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the German Constitution.
– article continues below –
The German government has until now relied on decrees to curb
the pandemic, a move that was criticised by all parties and deemed to be
unconstitutional by some. The newly passed law rectifies that problem
for the German government. Furthermore, as per provisions
of the law, an infected person or a person suspected to be suffering
from the infection can be ordered to refrain from practicing certain
professions. It also provides for quarantines and curfews.
Thus, the law would permit
the government to legally enforce lockdowns which could entail the
shutting down of shops and impose restrictions on social contact, rules
for mandatory masks, the stoppage of sporting events and other such
measures to prevent the spread of the Coronavirus pandemic. The passage
of the law was protested by numerous Germans and anti-lockdown
sentiments have been steadily rising over time.
Ontario lawyer files lawsuit against feds, province & CBC over Covid-19 measures & masks
Agatha Farmer Rocco Galati recently discussed the upcoming lawsuit against members of the Canadian Government, the CBC, as well as the topic of mandatory masking. Galati is a constitutional lawyer in Ontario and has been practising law for 31 years, he began his career with the federal department of justice.
During a July 17 interview with Amanda Forbes he said he has filed a constitutional challenge in the Ontario Superior Court on behalf of his clients seeking declatory and injunctive relief against Covid19 measures. Galati said that both the federal as well as provincial governments have “effectively dispensed with parliament and are ruling by royal decree as it were which is unconstitutional.” He is especially concerned about Ontario’s Bill 195 in which the government can implement executive orders on an ongoing basis with the extension of emergency measures possible for years to come. Galati said this is “unheard of.”
In the claim Galati has named the Trudeau government, Ford’s provincial government and the mayor of Toronto John Tory.
Apart from constitutional breaches which Galati said are “freedom of conscience, association, belief, right to life, liberty and security, your right against unreasonable search and seizure for the closure of businesses in an arbitrary and irrational manner, the right against arbitrary detention when bylaw officers stop you and ask you for information they are not allowed to ask. But also for the discriminatory way in which people with physical and neurological disabilities have been left out in the cold.”
Galati says another vulnerable group at the centre of the Covid measures are seniors.
“They are suffering solitary confinement in their own residence. These long term care facilities have turned into gulags … its atrocious,” he said. Galati, his clients and team are seeking relief from Covid19 measures that are being undertaken as he says that such measures as “social distancing, mandatory masks are neither scientifically nor medically based.” “The scientific community has an avalanche of evidence that says masks don’t work … up until now Teresa Tam, the WHO and the CDC said masks do not work to stop airborne, aerosol viruses and they actaully do harm to people. And all of a sudden after 4 months in the thick of the pandemic, during which time on public transit systems there was no social distancing, no masking all of a sudden everybody is required to wear a mask everywhere. Why? Becasue of polls indicating people have lost confidence in what the leaders are telling them and so the masking laws are a means of obedience. A potent prop to ensure obedience and compliance because people are not buying this. But the evidence is just not there. These measures are not medically or scientifically based,” Galati said. He notes that when the B.C. chief public health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry was asked why BC has allowed a social circle of 50 as oppose to Ontario where the circle was set at 10. Henry answered by saying that “this is not scientifically based. We think 50 is a reasonable number that we can trace. This is not based on science.”
“We are not following science here … these provisions infringe on the charter of rights,” Galati said
He is also preparing an injunction against the masking bylaw in Toronto. Galati takes note of the municipalities who are issuing mask bylaws and says these are “nasty government tactics.” Partly because the feds as well as the province could have issued mandatory masks but by scapegoating the responsibility on municipalities it ensures that any legal action would have to be taken region by region as oppose to against one general government entity.
“It’s not easy to build a legal challenge let alone in every single municipality in the province,” he admits.
He also takes a moment to address the fact that Mississauga’s mayor Bonnie Crombie while at meeting last week with all of Ontario’s municipal mayors tweeted to assure her constituents that Bill Gates was in attendance during the meeting and he is “seeing us through Covid.”
Interestingly enough Bill Gates is now funding the World Health Organization following Trump’s pulling of support for the group. Gallati adds that people who have profited from lockdowns and Covid-19 measures are large corporations.
The agenda is to “globalize, corperatize and virtualize the economy” according to Galati this has been set in motion by conglomerate foundations since 2010.
“The Rockerfeller Foundation report in 2010 poses a scenario where a virus escapes Wuhan, China and the gist of the report is about how to obtain global governance in a pandemic and you read that report that was written 10 years ago and you’re reading the script we are living today,” he said. Galati wants to know why the Trudeau and the Ford government have refused to disclose the substance and source of the medical advice they are obtaining. In his statement of claim Galati has 43 world and Canadian experts who have said that these measures are not scientific or medical. “Why are those voices not only ignored but not even addressed. They pretend they don’t exists, some of these voices are nobel prize winners in their field,” he said.
He says that any messages that contradict the government official agenda information have been deleted.
“This is so offensive, this is a global totalitarian tip toe.”
Galati references that there are 14 countries who never invoked Covid measures, a recent German study done on those countries indicates that the deaths from the virus in those countries were on average the same as in countries that had measures. In fact the 14 countries which did not lockdown are now fairing much better in the economics department. “If we study the countries that didn’t take measures we know it wasn’t worse and that’s a fact,” he said.
Galati confirmed that the CBC was named as a defendant because “normally a private news outlet does not owe any duty of care to its audience except not to defame … the CBC is not a private news organization so we say that they have a duty of care because CBC is a publicly funded broadcaster. They have a duty to properly investigate and be fair, objective and impartial in their news reporting.” Galati has included in this lawsuit that the outlet has “been to the Trudeau government what Programme One was to the Soviet Union during the cold war.”
Galati plans on taking the lawsuit as far as his clients instruct him to which includes the UN committee for human rights should he lose in Canada. He also plans on watching closely how the province will plan out the return of students to classrooms in September.
