Government’s totalitarian Covid Response a turning point in Canada’s history

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

A lawyer and former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party in Newfoundland has told the world that mishandling of COVID-19 deserves a reckoning before the world slides into totalitarianism.

In a half-hour interview with Dr. John Campbell on the latter’s YouTube channel, Ches Crosbie complained governments wanted the public to forget their “gigantic assault on the rights and liberties of Canadians.”

“No government seems to be interested in having a look back to learn lessons or to see what might be adjusted in order to make the response to any future pandemic, a more seamless, flawless and effective response. They just don’t want to do it. They have no interest in it,” Crosbie said.

Campbell, a retired nurse educator with almost three million YouTube subscribers, dryly quipped, “Presumably they’d want to do an inquiry to exonerate themselves and show how brilliant their performance was throughout the entire pandemic.”

Crosbie, an administrator for the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19, complained the 63 subpoenaed by the NCI to testify “want to run and hide” and never showed up.

“They think they have impunity. They don’t have to explain themselves or answer anything. It also speaks to their sense of embarrassment about what they did, that they don’t think they can defend themselves, even in a sympathetic environment,” Crosbie said.

The NCI report said Canada was put into “virtual state of terror.” Crosbie agreed and said “society went virtually mad” as it abandoned “principles of bodily integrity and personal sovereignty and the right of informed consent” and also Charter rights.

Crosbie pointed to the late Sheila Lewis who could not get an organ transplant due to refusing a COVID-19 vaccine.

“She passed away as a result. That is an incredible professional cruelty on the part of a branch of the medical profession which deserves to be roundly condemned. And those people need to account for it,” Crosbie said.

“The problem in Canada, maybe elsewhere, is that virtually every institution that we expected to defend our rights and freedoms and what we thought was normal life, failed us,” Crosbie explained.”

“That’s what the citizens of Canada told us. You can’t have that kind of gargantuan multi-institutional failure without deep self-reflection about what went wrong and how to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

The Rhodes scholar said by the end of the first two weeks of 2020 lockdowns, it was already apparent the “very old and those with comorbidities” had a “thousand-fold” higher risk of a COVID-19 fatality than “the young.”

“If you did want to justify that two weeks to stop the spread, then we had enough information at the end of that to know that this was not the answer, and the COVID 19 virus was not the threat to life on Earth that had been portrayed,” Crosbie said.

“That turned out to have and was argued by many at the time to have no greater case fatality rate than a seasonal influenza.”

Even so, lockdowns continued, followed by mandates for masks and vaccines, something Crosbie said demands an accounting.

“You can’t have reconciliation when those who perpetrated what the citizens of the country believe to be an unwarranted invasion of their economic, social, political and legal rights and freedoms, refuse to explain why they did it, or in any respect to account for it.

“And this is why I think that there will eventually be criminal proceedings because they are necessary, given the enormity of what’s occurred.”

Crosbie said documentation the NCI put on public record contributed to a “a tipping point” where “the truth is constantly coming out.”

Campbell agreed and said allegations of gain of function research and the origins of the virus that “appeared ridiculous, appeared conspiratorial” have been “essentially confirmed.”

Crosbie said a public shift was evident in the election of new governments in Europe with a “more critical point of view on the events of the last few years, and…the WHO power grab.” He added Canada also needed a change of government and the COVID-19 “injectable products” banned.

“How can it be safe and effective when there’s foreign DNA and simian virus in this stuff, and there are other facts beyond dispute that can be added up here to say that no one would have agreed in the right mind to receive these in the first place, had they known about it?” Crosbie said.

Campbell chidingly said, “I assume the mainstream media in Canada’s been keen to pick this up as well.” Crosbie said it was a “major problem” that they had not.

“The bottom line is you can’t have a free country if you don’t have a free press. You don’t have democracy. And that’s where we are right now, not just in Canada, but in other countries like the United States, like the United Kingdom, in Europe,” explained Crosbie.

“We’re at a crisis point in history where we were either going to have a liberal democracy with constitutional rights and freedoms, or we’re going to have totalitarianism.”

Lee Harding is a research fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Up Next

Taxpayers release Naughty and Nice List

Don't Miss

Teacher refuses to give up fight for free speech after being canceled for objecting to LGBT books

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

RIP DEI?

Daily Caller / 2 hours ago

‘This Is So Disgusting’: Joe Rogan Unloads On Gavin Newsom For ‘Creepy’ Behavior In Front Of Wildfire Wreckage

DEI / 3 hours ago

Biden FBI shut down diversity office before Trump administration could review it

COVID-19

Canadian judge rejects complaint against maskless workplaces as frivolous

Published on January 15, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling ‘unsafe’ following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable

A federal judge ruled that complaints that maskless workplaces pose a danger to employees’ health are frivolous, ending the final chapter of COVID regulations.

According to information published on January 15 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling unsafe following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable.

“The applicant’s concern about an unsafe workplace was based on his assessment that a significant number of people would return to the workplace under the return-to-work model, that any of these people may have contracted Covid-19 and that the non-mandatory recommendations and precautions relating to Covid-19 fell short of what he believes would be a safe work environment,” wrote the court.

Masks were mandated in federal workplaces from April 20, 2020, to February 14, 2023, under the direction of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. At the same time, millions of Canadians were forced to mask in public settings such as grocery stores or hospitals.

After the mandate had lifted, Juzda, a “fully vaccinated” individual without any particular health issues, complained that he felt unsafe in the Gatineau headquarters.

“I must excuse my right to refuse work that constitutes a danger,” he wrote, referencing the Canada Labor Code that allows federally regulated staff to refuse work “that constitutes a danger to the employee.”

Juzda claimed that masking “reduces the risk of contracting Covid-19 but is of limited effectiveness if not combined with other measures, particularly during prolonged exposure to unmasked infected individuals such as being nearby in an indoor office for an entire day.”

“Covid-19 is a disease that in addition to often being extremely unpleasant during the acute period poses significant risks including death,” he continued.

“Handwashing and workplace cleaning are of minimal use in limiting the spread of Covid-19,” Juzda claimed.

Indeed, LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on overwhelming evidence showing that masks are ineffective in preventing transmission of COVID and that they come with harmful effects.

Back in 2021, 47 studies confirmed the ineffectiveness of masks for COVID, while 32 more confirmed their negative health effects.

According to another 2021 report, more than 170 studies have found that masks have been ineffective at stopping COVID and instead have been harmful, especially to children.

In fact, in 2020, before masks were widely mandated, Canada’s chief public health officer Dr. Theresa Tam admitted that masks were not effective in preventing COVID.

“There is no need to use a mask for well people,” she said in the first few weeks of the pandemic. “It hasn’t been proven really to protect you from getting the virus.”

COVID-19

Canadian parents wary of COVID, flu shots for children

Published on January 14, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Government research has found that Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with COVID or flu shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects

Canadian parents are remaining wary of COVID and flu shots for children despite ongoing publicity campaigns.

According to in-house research by the Public Health Agency obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter, many Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with the experimental COVID shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects.

“Continued monitoring of parental knowledge and views around Covid-19 and influenza are important to adapt public communication and education accordingly,” the report said.

“Monitoring parental attitudes is essential to predict expected vaccine take-up and guide education and awareness efforts to promote vaccination,” it continued.

In Canada, COVID shots are both approved and encouraged for all children over six months of age, despite the fact that the latest Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots for children under 12 were only granted emergency use authorization in the U.S.

The research asked parents if they planned to give their children updated COVID shots, to which only 17 percent said they “definitely will”; 26 percent said they “probably won’t”; and 28 percent said they “definitely won’t.”

Those who planned to refuse the reoccurring shots revealed they were “concerned there was not enough research on the vaccine,” questioned the effectiveness of the shots, mistrusted the government information surrounding COVID shots, or their doctor had never mentioned it.

Similarly, 19.5 percent reported being “somewhat hesitant” to give their child the COVID shot, while 21 percent said they were “very hesitant.”

Likewise, parents were hesitant to give their children annual flu shots, over concerns of it being unnecessary and potential side effects.

Parents’ hesitancy to jab their young children comes after research has proven that the COVID shots are not only unnecessary but pose serious health risks, especially to children.

Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.

The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects, such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.

The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.

A report from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed at least 21,000 side effects, with 24 deaths of American children ages 12 to 17 after COVID shots.