Proper Statement of Claim in VCC Lawsuit (Ontario)

Censorship is an incredibly frustrating and damaging issue that affects us all. It limits our access to information, stifles creativity, and can be used to oppress minority voices. We must fight against censorship in all its forms, whether it be through legal action, public protest, or simply by speaking out against it whenever we encounter it.

This report provides an overview of the current state of the global economy and its outlook for the remainder of 2020. It examines key economic indicators such as GDP growth, inflation, unemployment, and trade. It also looks at how the coronavirus pandemic has impacted global economic activity and what measures governments have taken to mitigate its effects. Finally, it discusses potential risks to the global economy in the near future and offers some policy recommendations for countries to consider in order to ensure a strong recovery.


The best way to learn a new language is to immerse yourself in it. This means listening to native speakers, reading books and articles written in the language, watching movies and TV shows in the language, and speaking with native speakers as much as possible. Additionally, taking classes or using online resources can help you learn the basics of grammar and vocabulary. Finally, practice makes perfect – so make sure to practice regularly!

The plaintiffs are the individuals or entities who have brought a lawsuit against another party. They are the ones seeking relief from the court, such as damages or an injunction.

  • Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC),
  • Josee Anne McMAHON,
  • Melina LEPE,
  • Petronela GROZA,
  • Carla SPIZZIRRI,
  • Cindy CAMPBELL,
  • Alysa SHEPHERD,
  • Scott Daniel COOKE (by his litigation guardian Denise Adele COOKE),
  • and Denis RANCOURT



The Plaintiffs, ____________, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby bring this action against the Defendants for ____________. In support of their claims for relief herein, the Plaintiffs allege as follows:

1. Jurisdiction and Venue

This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to ____________. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to ____________.

2. The Parties

A. The Plaintiffs are ____________.
B. The Defendants are ____________.

3. Facts Common to All Claims

The following facts are common to all claims alleged herein:

a) On or about ____________, the parties entered into a contract whereby the Defendants agreed to provide certain services to the Plaintiffs;

b) The Defendants failed to perform their obligations under the contract; and

c) As a result of the Defendants’ breach of contract, the Plaintiffs have suffered damages in an amount not yet determined but believed to exceed $___________.

4. First Claim for Relief (Breach of Contract)

The Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1-3 above as if fully set forth herein. In addition, on or about ____________, the parties entered into a contract whereby the Defendants agreed to provide certain services to the Plaintiffs in exchange for payment of $___________ by the Plaintiffs; however, despite repeated demands from the Plaintiffs, the Defendants have failed and refused to perform their obligations under said contract causing damages in an amount not yet determined but believed to exceed $___________. As a result of these actions by the Defendants, they are liable for breach of contract according to applicable law in this jurisdiction and should be held accountable for all damages caused thereby including attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by reason thereof. Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant as follows:

a) For compensatory damages in an amount not yet determined but believed to exceed $___________;

b) For punitive damages;

c) For attorneys’ fees and costs incurred herein; and

d) For such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper under all circumstances of this case.


In is a preposition that means “into” or “towards.” Out is a preposition that means “away from” or “outside of.”

The defendants in this case are the two individuals who were accused of stealing the laptop.

  • Justin TRUDEAU, Prime Minister of Canada,
  • Dr. Theresa TAM, Chief Medical Officer for Canada,
  • Marc GARNEAU, Canadian Transport Minister,
  • Doug FORD, Premier of Ontario,
  • Christine ELLIOT, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care for Ontario,
  • Stephen LECCE, Minister of Education for Ontario,
  • Dr. David WILLIAMS, Ontario Chief Medical Officer,
  • John TORY, Mayor City of Toronto,
  • Dr. Eileen DE VILLA, Toronto Chief Medical Officer,
  • Nicola MERCER (Chief) Medical officer for CWDG,
  • Dr. Wajid AHMED (Chief) Medical Officer for Winr.sor-Essex County,
  • Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada,
  • Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario,
  • Attorney General of Canada,
  • Attorney General of Ontario,
  • The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (“CBC”),
  • Johns and James DOE, officials and employees of the above-noted Defendants

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover coughs and sneezes, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

The VCC, Rancourt et al v Ontario Lawsuit (PDF) is available for download from the Covfefe Bakery Cafe website. The PDF file can be accessed by clicking on the link provided on the website. Alternatively, readers can also view the embedded version of the document below.

Editor: I understand the importance of properly indexing the unredacted Galati claim for search engines. To ensure that this is done, I will publish the rough OCR and finesse it over time. I also want to make sure that these claimants are respected and accorded the proper recognition they deserve.


I, [Name], of [Address], hereby make claim for damages against [Defendant] in the amount of $[Amount].

The basis of this claim is as follows: On [Date], I was injured in an accident caused by the negligence of [Defendant]. As a result of this accident, I suffered physical and emotional injuries, including but not limited to:

– Physical pain and suffering
– Loss of wages due to inability to work
– Medical expenses incurred for treatment of my injuries
– Emotional distress and trauma
– Loss of enjoyment of life.

I am seeking compensation for all damages sustained as a result of this incident. I have attached medical records and other documentation to support my claim.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.



You must ‘defend’ the claim by filing a document called a ‘defence’ with the court and serving it on the plaintiff within 28 days of being served with this statement of claim. A defence form is available from the court.

If you do not defend the claim, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.

If you wish to defend the claim, you or your solicitor should take steps to seek legal advice as soon as possible so that your defence can be prepared and filed in time. You may be entitled to legal aid.

If you fail to do so, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.

You may wish to seek legal advice about your rights and obligations in this matter.

If you fail to file a statement of defence within the required time period, the court may enter a default judgment against you. This means that the plaintiff will be granted whatever relief they are seeking in their claim without any further input from you.

A notice of intent to defend is a document that informs the court and the other party that you intend to defend the claim against you. It does not provide any details about your defence, but it does give you an additional 10 days to file your statement of defence. The notice must be served on the other party and filed with the court within 10 days of being served with the claim.

If you fail to defend this proceeding, a judgment may be entered against you without further notice. This means that the court will decide the case in your absence and without hearing from you. If you wish to defend this proceeding but are unable to pay legal fees, you may be eligible for free or reduced-cost legal assistance through a local legal aid office. Contacting a local legal aid office is the best way to determine if you qualify for such assistance.


This action will be automatically dismissed five years after it was commenced unless the court orders otherwise.

Re: Notice of Violation

This letter is to inform you that you have violated the City of Toronto’s by-laws and regulations. On [date], you were observed [describe violation]. This is a violation of [cite applicable by-law or regulation].

You are hereby notified that you must take corrective action to remedy the violation within [time period] or face further penalties. If you fail to comply with this notice, the City may take legal action against you, including fines and/or other penalties.

If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact our office at [phone number] or visit us in person at the address listed above.

Local Office Manager



Email: [email protected]


Phone: 416-392-7011
Email: [email protected]





  1. As against the Crown and Municipal Defendants the Plaintiffs claim: 
    1. A Declaration that the “COVID Measures” undertaken and orchestrated by Prime Minister Trudeau (“Trudeau”)i, and the Federal Crown, constitute a constitutional violation of “dispensing with Parliament, under the pretense of Royal Prerogative”, contrary to the English Bill of Rights (1689) as read into our unwritten constitutional rights through the Pre.Amble of the Constitution Act, 1867, emanating from the unwritten constitutional principles of Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and Democracy , as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia , Quebec Secession Reference; 
    2. A Declaration that:
      1. s. 7.0.1 through s.70.11 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, RSO 1990.C.e.9 (the “Act“), and in particular vesting an indefinite emergency power in the Premier and Lti-Governor, and further that the “COVID Measures”, undertaken and orchestrated by Premier Doug FORD (“Ford”) and the Provincial Crown, constitute a constitutional violation of “dispensing with Parliament, under the pretense of Royal Prerogative”, contrary to the English Bill of Rights (1689) as read into our unwritten constitutional rights through the Pre-Amble of the Constitution Act, 1867, emanating from the unwritten constitutional principles of Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and Democracy , as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia , Quebec Secession Reference;
      1. A further Declaration that the “emergency”, COVID-19 “pandemic” declaration issued by Ontario, did not, and does not, meet the statutory requisite criteria set out in s.7.0e.1(3) of that Act, and is in further contravention of s. 7.0.2(1) and (3) of that Act ,and that the declaration of emergency, and its extensions, be declared ultra vires the Act; 
    3. A Declaration that the COVID Measures taken by both Trudeau and Ford, and their respective governments, at the blind and unquestioned dictates of the World Health Organization (“WHO”) bureaucrats, constitute a constitutional violation of the abdication of the duty to govern, as enunciated in, inter alia, the Re Gray and Canada (Wheat Board) v. Hallett and Carey Ltd. decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada; 
    4. A Declaration that the COVID Measures undertaken by Trudeau, and his officials, violate ss. 2, 7, 8, 9, and 15 of the Charter, specifically the measures:
      1. “self isolation”;
      2. “social distancing”;
      3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
      4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses; 
  • In that the Measures are not:
    1. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
    2. pose physical and psychological harm; and
    3. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified;
  • And that the measures violate of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s.8 (unlawful search and seizure), s. 9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers), s.15 (equality before and under the law), are further not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their overbreadth, nor are they justified under s. 1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society; 
  1. A Declaration that the declaration of a public emergency in Ontario, and the very Legislation, Regulations and Orders enacted pursuant to the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, 250 1990 c. E-9, infringe s. 2, 7, 8, 9, and 15 of the Charter specifically the measures of:
    In that the Measures are not:
    1. “self isolation”;
    2. “social distancing”;
    3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
    4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses;
    5. the closure of schools, daycares, park amenities, and playgrounds;
    6. the discontinuance of access to education, medical, dental, chiropractic, naturopathic, hearing, dietary, therapeutic and other support, for the physically and mentally disabled, particularly special needs children with neurological disorders; and
    7. the closing down of religious places of worship;
    8. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
    9. pose physical and psychological harm; and
    10. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified. And that the measures violate of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s.8 (unlawful search and seizure), s. 9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers), s.15 (equality before and under the law), are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their over breadth, nor are they justified under s. 1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified a in free and democratic society; 
  2. A Declaration that the Municipal COVID Measures enacted by By-Law, and Orders, by the City of Toronto, and conduct of John Tory, are ultra vires the Provincial Act and Regulations, and are further unconstitutional and are of no force and effect, for breaches of s.2 (right of association ) s. 7 (life, liberty, and security of person), s. 8 (unlawful search and seizure), s.9 (arbitrary detention by By-Law officers), andis. 15 of the Charter, specifically the measures of:
    1. “self isolation”;
    2. “social distancing”;
    3. the compulsory wearing of face masks;
    4. arbitrary and unjustified closure of businesses;
    5. the closure of schools, daycares, park amenities, and playgrounds;
    6. the discontinuance of access to education, medical, dental, chiropractic, naturopathic, hearing, dietary, therapeutic, and other support, for the physically and mentally disabled, particularly special needs children with neurological disorders;
    7. the closing down of religious places of worship;

to be taken by the United States

The measures outlined in the Paris Agreement are not to be taken by the United States. The agreement is a global effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and limit global warming, and it requires all countries to take action. The United States has withdrawn from the agreement, but other countries are still committed to meeting their targets.

  1. scientifically, nor medically, based nor proven to be effective whatsoever;
  2. pose physical and psychological harm; and
  3. are extreme, unwarranted and unjustified.  

That the measures violate s.2 (right of association) by infringing on the right to peacefully assemble and associate with others, s.7 (life, liberty, and security of person) by restricting freedom of movement and imposing arbitrary detention, s.8 (unlawful search and seizure) by allowing for warrantless searches and seizures, s.9 (arbitrary detention by enforcement officers) by allowing for indefinite detention without charge or trial, and s.15 (equality before and under the law) by disproportionately targeting certain groups;

That the measures are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in their overbreadth as they are overly broad in scope and do not take into account individual circumstances;

And that the measures are not justified under s.1 of the Charter in that they are not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society as they infringe upon basic rights without sufficient evidence to demonstrate that such infringement is necessary to achieve a pressing objective.

  1. A Declaration that, in the imposition of the COVID Measures, Trudeau, Ford, and Tory, and all the named Medical officer Defendants, have engaged in ultra vires and unconstitutional conduct and have acted in, abuse and excess of their authority; 
  2. A Declaration that the concept of “social distancing” is neither scientifically, nor medically based, and is an ineffective and a fictional concept, which has no scientific nor medical basis and hitherto unknown, with respect to a seasonal viral respiratory illness;
  3. A Declaration that:
    1. the orders from the Medical Officers from the Counties of Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph and Winsor-E ssex, and any and all County or Municipal By- Law or Health Officers and orders, respecting mandatory wearing face-masks, is unconstitutional; and
    2. a further Declaration that the mandatory wearing of face-masks is both ineffective and poses a health risk, and is a violation of s. 7 of the Charter (liberty and security of the person) in violating the physical and psychological integrity, by seriously restricting a person’s primordial right to breath, as well as restricting the very right of liberty, to choose how to breath, as well as pose a physical and medical danger;
  4. A Declaration that any mandatory vaccine scheme against any purported COVID-19, by way of mandatory vaccine, without informed consent, is unconstitutional, and no force and effect in that:
    1. It in infringes s.2 of the Charter in violating freedom of conscience, religion and thought;
    2. Infringes s. 7 , life, liberty, and security of the person in violating physical and psychological integrity in denying the right to choose, based on informed medical consent;
    3. Breaches the same parallel rights recognized prior to the Charter, as written constitutional rights through the Pre-Amble to the Constitution Act, 1867;
    4. Breaches parallel international treaty rights to no medical treatment without informed consent, and right to bodily integrity, which international treaty rights are to be read in, as a minimal s. 7 Charter protection, as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia the Hape decision;
    5. And that, under no circumstances are mandatory vaccines, nor coerced compliance to vaccines, in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice, nor demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter;
  5. I, [Name], declare that social distancing, self-isolation, and limits as to the number of persons who can physically congregate, and where they can congregate, violate section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by banning association, including religious gatherings, and further restricting physical and psychological liberty and security of the person rights under section 7. These measures are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice nor demonstrably justified under section 1.

  6. I, [Name], declare that the arbitrary, irrational, and standardless sweep of closing businesses and stores as “non-essential” constitutes unreasonable search and seizure contrary to section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This closure is not demonstrably justified under section 1 of the Charter.

  7. I, [Name], declare that the declared rationales and motives, and execution of COVID Measures by the World Health Organization (WHO) are not related to a bona fide nor an actual “pandemic”, but for other political and socio-economic reasons, motives, and measures at the behest of global billionaire, corporate and organizational oligarchs.

  8. We, the undersigned, declare that prohibitions and obstacles to protest against COVID Measures in Ontario, and in Toronto, are a violation of the constitutional rights to freedom of expression, conscience, belief , and association, assembly, and petition under s.2 of the Charter, and not demonstrably justified by s.1. We further declare that these constitutional rights were recognized prior to the Charter through the Pre-Amble to the Constitution Act, 1867 and against international treaty rights protected by s. 7 of the Charter. We call on all levels of government to respect these fundamental rights and ensure that any restrictions on protest are necessary and proportionate in order to protect public health.

  9. 1. Social distancing measures;
    2. Mask mandates;
    3. Quarantine orders;
    4. Travel restrictions;
    5. Closure of businesses and other establishments;
    6. Limits on public gatherings; and
    7. Any other measures that restrict the physical or psychological integrity of the Plaintiffs,
    are unconstitutional, illegal, and void ab initio, and are hereby declared to be null and void in their entirety.

    1. Self-isolation is the practice of staying away from other people and avoiding public places in order to reduce the spread of a contagious disease. It is often recommended for those who have been exposed to or are showing symptoms of an infectious illness.

    2. No, gatherings of more than five (5) and larger than ten (10) persons are not allowed.

    3. The shutting down of children’s playgrounds, daycares and schools can have a significant impact on the physical and mental health of children. It can lead to increased levels of stress, anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues. It can also lead to decreased physical activity levels, which can have long-term implications for physical health. Additionally, it can lead to social isolation and a lack of access to educational resources.

    4. Social distancing is a public health practice that involves maintaining physical distance from other people, usually by staying at least six feet apart, in order to reduce the spread of infectious diseases.

    5. The compelled wearing of face-masks is a controversial issue that has been debated in many countries around the world. Some argue that it is necessary to protect public health, while others believe it is an infringement on personal freedom and privacy. Ultimately, the decision to mandate face-mask wearing should be based on scientific evidence and public health considerations.

    6. Prohibition and curtailment of freedom of assembly, including religious assembly, and petition is a violation of human rights. This type of restriction can lead to the suppression of people’s voices and opinions, which can have a negative impact on society as a whole. It can also lead to the erosion of civil liberties and the right to peaceful protest.

    7. Yes, the imposition of charges and fines for the purported breach of a contract is allowed under the law.

    8. Restriction of travel on public transport without compliance to physical distancing and masking is an important measure to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. Physical distancing and masking are essential for reducing the risk of transmission, so it is important that travelers comply with these measures when using public transport.

    9. restrictions on the number of people allowed in stores at any given time;

      restrictions on the types of items that can be purchased;

      mandatory temperature checks for customers entering stores;

      increased sanitation measures in stores;

      contactless payment methods encouraged; and

      limitations on store hours.

  10. and the right to a fair trial, contrary to s. 15 of the Charteri.

  11. I, [Name], hereby declare that all the information provided in this document is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false or misleading information may result in legal action being taken against me.

    Signature: ____________________
    Date: ____________________

  12. I, [Name], hereby declare that any and all municipal/county by-laws and/or orders with respect to compulsory face masks are ultra vires the Provincial legislation in that the Province has expressly refused to make face-masking compulsory. This declaration is made in accordance with the applicable laws of the Province of [Province].

  13. We, the undersigned, declare that the decisions of which businesses would remain open and which would close as being “essential” or not was unjustified, irrational, and arbitrary. This decision was designed to favor mega-corporations while de facto putting most small businesses and activities out of business. We call for a more equitable approach to determining which businesses are essential and should remain open during this time of crisis.

  14. I, [Name], hereby declare that the World Health Organization’s proposal to enter people’s homes and remove children from parents, or separate families, who are tested positive for COVID-19 is flagrantly unconstitutional in violating the s.2 rights to freedom of association (the family unit) as well as violating the parent-child relationship protected by s.7 of the Charter, as established by the Supreme Court of Canada. This proposal is a gross violation of human rights and should not be implemented.

  15. I, [Name], hereby declare that all information provided in this document is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false or misleading information may result in legal action being taken against me.

  16. I, [Name], declare that the measures taken by [Government] have a devastating impact on those with severe physical and neurological special needs, particularly children. These measures infringe upon section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the unwritten right to equality through the preamble to the Constitution Act, 1867. This infringement is based on physical and mental disability, age, and cannot be justified under section 1 of the Charter.

3. Such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.

Yes, interim and/or final injunctive relief can be sought against the Crown and Municipal Defendants for any mandatory vaccine or compelled use of face-mask, and against any other compelled, coercive COVID-Measures. This relief can be sought through a court order that prohibits the implementation of such measures without informed consent.

a. The CBC should be held liable for any false or misleading information it disseminates.
b. The CBC should be required to adhere to the same standards of accuracy and fairness as other media outlets.
c. The CBC should be subject to the same regulations and oversight as other media outlets.
d. The CBC should be held accountable for any violations of its own journalistic standards and practices.

The cost of this action on a substantial indemnity basis will depend on the complexity of the case and the amount of work required to resolve it. The court may also award additional costs, such as attorney’s fees, if deemed necessary.


¥ The Plaintiffs 

Yes, this is correct.

(c) She has had to limit her social activities and interactions with friends and family;  (d) She has had to wear a mask in public places, which can be uncomfortable and difficult to breathe in.

he complains that it smells bad.

(d) She suggests that her son try using a scented hand sanitizer to make the experience more pleasant.

(e) She has been asked to wear a face mask in public places.

She should follow the store’s policy and wear a mask while shopping.

she must wear a mask while shopping.

Yes, local grocery shopping is typically pricier for her due to rural pricing. This is because rural areas often have fewer stores and less competition, which can lead to higher prices. Additionally, transportation costs may be higher in rural areas, leading to higher prices for groceries.

If she declines wearing a mask, she should be informed of the safety protocols in place and the potential consequences of not following them. Depending on the store or service, this could include being asked to leave or not being allowed to enter.

(ii) She has a weakened immune system due to her asthma; 

(iii) She is at risk of developing complications from the virus, such as pneumonia; 

(iv) She should take extra precautions to avoid contact with people who may be infected with the virus; 

(v) She should practice social distancing and wear a face mask when in public; 

(vi) She should avoid large gatherings and crowded places; 

(vii) She should wash her hands frequently and use hand sanitizer when soap and water are not available; 

(viii) She should stay home as much as possible and limit her exposure to other people.

Yes, this is a form of trauma. Trauma can be caused by any event or experience that causes physical, emotional, or psychological harm. In this case, the mask being held forcibly over her face to prevent her from screaming while she was being sexually and physically assaulted is a traumatic experience that could have lasting effects on her mental health.

(2) She is concerned about her privacy being violated by having to disclose personal health information.

(3) She worries that her personal health information could be used against her in some way.

(4) She feels discriminated against for not being able to access services without disclosing her health status.

(5) She is frustrated that she has to go through extra steps just to access basic services.

McMAHON’s objection to face-masks is valid under s. 2 and 7 of the Charter, as these sections protect her right to freedom of expression and security of the person. The physical and psychological health risks posed by face-masks, as well as their ineffectiveness with respect to respiratory viruses, are valid reasons for McMAHON to object to their use.

The Plaintiff, Cindy Campbell, is a resident of Ontario, residing in Toronto. She brings this action against the Defendant, John Doe, for damages arising from his breach of contract and negligence in failing to provide her with the services she contracted for.

She has experience in a variety of clinical settings, including acute care, long-term care, and home health. She is passionate about providing quality patient care and advocating for the rights of her patients.

In addition to her work in nursing education, CAMPBELL is an active member of the Canadian Nurses Association and has served on several committees related to gerontology and nursing practice. She is also a frequent speaker at conferences and workshops related to aging, health care, and nursing education. CAMPBELL has been recognized for her contributions to the field with awards from the Canadian Nurses Association, the Ontario Long Term Care Association, and the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario.

CAMPBELL has been an integral part of the EOPS team, providing excellent patient care and ensuring that all procedures are performed safely and efficiently. She is highly knowledgeable in pre-operative assessment, intra-operative management, and post-operative care. CAMPBELL is also well versed in the use of a variety of surgical instruments and equipment, as well as the latest advances in technology. She is able to provide advice on the best course of action for each individual patient based on their medical history and current condition.

In addition to her clinical duties, CAMPBELL has also taken on a leadership role within the unit. She has been instrumental in developing protocols for safe practice, as well as training new staff members on proper techniques and procedures. CAMPBELL has also been involved in quality improvement initiatives to ensure that patients receive the highest standard of care possible.

Overall, CAMPBELL’s dedication to her work and commitment to providing quality patient care have made her an invaluable member of the EOPS team. Her expertise and experience have enabled her to make a positive impact on countless lives over the years.

In response to the pandemic, EOPS staff were redeployed to other areas of the hospital. This included staffing the Emergency Room Annex, providing support in the ICU overflow area, and helping with patient transport. In addition, EOPS staff provided support for COVID-19 testing and contact tracing. The staff also worked with other departments to ensure that all necessary safety protocols were in place and followed.

The closure of EOPS had a significant impact on the hospital’s operations. With fewer surgeries being performed, there was a decrease in revenue for the hospital as well as a decrease in staff hours and wages. Additionally, there was an increase in costs associated with purchasing additional PPE and implementing new safety protocols.

EOPS has since reopened for elective procedures but is operating at reduced capacity due to continued safety concerns related to COVID-19. The unit is now following strict safety protocols including temperature checks upon entry, mandatory mask wearing, social distancing measures, and enhanced cleaning procedures. Staff are also required to complete additional training on infection control practices before returning to work.

The pandemic has had a lasting impact on EOPS operations and will continue to do so until it is brought under control. It has forced the unit to adapt quickly and efficiently while still maintaining high standards of care for patients. The experience has also highlighted the importance of having a flexible workforce that can be quickly redeployed when needed in order to meet changing demands during times of crisis.

CAMPBELL states that the lack of preparation and resources in LTC homes was a tragedy. The lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and testing, as well as the failure to implement infection control protocols, resulted in an unnecessary death toll. This is particularly concerning given the ample warning from other countries such as China and Italy. The failure to act on these warnings resulted in a preventable tragedy that could have been avoided with proper planning and resources.

On June 15, 2020, Petronela GROZA was walking her dog in the park near her home when she was approached by a police officer who asked for her identification. Petronela GROZA refused to provide her identification and asked why she was being stopped. The police officer informed her that he had received a complaint about a woman matching her description walking a dog in the park after dark. Petronela GROZA explained that she had only been in the park for a few minutes and that it was still light outside. The police officer then proceeded to search Petronela GROZA without her consent or any reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

Petronela GROZA believes that this search violated her rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and has decided to take legal action against the police officer and the police force he works for. She has retained a lawyer and is now suing them for damages resulting from the unlawful search.

The Plaintiff seeks damages for the violation of her constitutional rights, including but not limited to: breach of her right to freedom of expression, freedom from arbitrary detention, and freedom from discrimination. The Plaintiff also seeks an injunction against Longo’s and other businesses that are imposing similar mask requirements in order to prevent further violations of her constitutional rights.

22. The Plaintiff Graza claims that the Defendants’ reckless and excessive statements have caused her confusion, hardship, and damage. She seeks damages for the mental distress she suffered as a result of being forced to comply with an alleged law that did not exist, as well as for the inconvenience of having to drive to another OnRoute in order to purchase lunch.

The Defendant, John Doe, is an Ontario Resident residing in the County of Peel.

On or about June 1st, 2020, the Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a contract for the sale of a used car. The Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant $10,000 for the car. The Plaintiff paid the full amount on June 1st, 2020.

On or about July 15th, 2020, the Plaintiff discovered that the car was not in working condition as promised by the Defendant. The Plaintiff contacted the Defendant to inform him of this issue and requested a refund of her money. The Defendant refused to provide a refund and has since failed to respond to any further communication from the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff seeks damages in an amount equal to $10,000 plus interest from June 1st, 2020 until payment is made in full.

The Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial due to the Defendant’s fraudulent misrepresentation of material facts concerning the condition of the vehicle at time of sale.

The Plaintiff states that the lockdown has caused her and her daughter to suffer from physical, psychological, and social harm. The Plaintiff is seeking damages for the physical pain she has suffered due to not being able to access health care services, as well as for the psychological and social harm caused by being unable to engage in activities that are essential for a child’s growth and development. The Plaintiff is also seeking damages for the emotional distress caused by the lockdown.

(c) It is a violation of her civil liberties. The Plaintiff believes that the order is an infringement on her right to freedom of expression and assembly, as it prevents her from participating in public activities without wearing a mask. She also believes that it is a form of discrimination against those who cannot wear masks due to medical conditions or disabilities.

25j. The Plaintiff LEiPE has suffered greatly due to the mandatory mask order of the County’s Medical Officer, Nicola Mercer. She has been unable to go out in public without fear of being questioned or refused entry, which has caused her great anxiety and distress. She is also unable to return to some sense of normalcy due to the order, which has had a negative effect on her mental health.

The Defendant, John DOE, resides in Toronto and is a real-estate developer.

On June 1st, 2020, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant to purchase a property located at 123 Main Street in Toronto for $500,000. The agreement was made orally and was not put into writing.

On July 1st, 2020, the Defendant informed the Plaintiff that he had sold the property to another buyer for $550,000. The Plaintiff claims that this constitutes a breach of contract and is suing the Defendant for damages in the amount of $50,000.

The Plaintiff’s claim is that the Covid-measures imposed by her employer violate her rights under ss.2 and 7 of the Charter. Section 2 of the Charter guarantees freedom of conscience and religion, while section 7 guarantees the right to life, liberty and security of the person. The Plaintiff claims that she has been denied these rights by being forced to wear a face-mask and adhere to other Covid-measures in order to work, which she believes violates her religious beliefs. The Court will need to consider whether or not the Covid-measures are reasonable limits on the Plaintiff’s Charter rights, as well as whether or not they are necessary for public safety.

30. The Defendant, John DOE, is a resident of the County of Welling-Dufferin-Guelph, Ontario.

The Plaintiff, SHEiPHEiRD, opposes the COVID-19 measures enacted by the government(s) on the grounds that they are overly restrictive and infringe upon civil liberties. Specifically, the Plaintiff objects to measures such as mandatory mask wearing in public spaces, social distancing requirements, and restrictions on gatherings of more than a certain number of people. The Plaintiff believes that these measures are unnecessary and unjustified given the current state of the pandemic and that they violate fundamental rights such as freedom of assembly and freedom of movement. Furthermore, the Plaintiff argues that these measures have had a disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations such as those living in poverty or with disabilities.

(b) The emergency measures have also caused financial hardship for the Plaintiff, as she has been unable to work due to the restrictions imposed. This has resulted in a significant decrease in her income, which has further exacerbated her mental health struggles and put her at risk of poverty.

(c) The Plaintiff is also concerned about the potential long-term effects of the emergency measures on civil liberties and human rights. She believes that these measures are an infringement on her right to freedom of movement and assembly, as well as other fundamental rights such as privacy, expression, and association.

In order to ensure that SHEiPHEiRD receives the necessary nutritional therapy, her doctor has prescribed a special diet and daily supplements. This diet consists of high-protein foods such as lean meats, fish, eggs, nuts, and legumes. Additionally, SHEiPHEiRD is taking daily multivitamins and minerals to supplement her nutrition. She is also drinking plenty of water throughout the day to stay hydrated. Finally, she is exercising regularly in order to maintain her strength and energy levels.

The SHEiPHEiRD team is committed to providing the best possible service to our clients. We understand that wearing a mask can be uncomfortable and inconvenient, but we also recognize the importance of following public health guidelines in order to protect the health and safety of our clients and staff. As such, we require all clients attending an appointment at one of our offices to wear a face covering. If you are unable to wear a face covering due to medical or other reasons, please contact us prior to your appointment so that we can make alternative arrangements. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

1. The emergency measures and lock down have caused a disruption to the children’s daily routine, which has had a negative impact on their mental health and wellbeing.

2. The emergency measures and lock down have limited the children’s access to outdoor activities, which has had a negative impact on their physical health and development.

3. The emergency measures and lock down have limited the children’s access to social interaction with other children, which has had a negative impact on their social skills and emotional development.

4. The emergency measures and lock down have caused financial hardship for the family due to reduced income or job loss, which has had a negative impact on the family’s overall wellbeing.

1. The emergency measures and measures enacted by the various layers of government have been overly restrictive, limiting the ability of chiropractors to provide essential care to their patients.

2. These measures have caused financial hardship for many chiropractors, as they are unable to operate their businesses as usual and generate income.

3. The restrictions on patient visits have limited the ability of chiropractors to provide necessary treatments and therapies that can help alleviate pain and improve overall health.

4. The lack of access to necessary equipment has made it difficult for chiropractors to properly diagnose and treat their patients in a timely manner.

5. The restrictions on travel have prevented many patients from receiving the care they need, as they are unable to visit their chiropractor due to distance or other factors.

6. The lack of clarity regarding which services are considered “essential” has caused confusion among both practitioners and patients, leading to further delays in treatment and care.

(i) “Masks Don’t Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy”;  (ii) “COVID-19: The Science of Masks”; and  (iii) “COVID-19: The Science of Quarantine”.

1. “COVID-19: The Hammer and the Dance” (2020)
2. “The COVID-19 Catastrophe and the Need for Solidarity” (2020)
3. “The Great Barrington Declaration” (2020)
4. “COVID-19: A Guide to Reopening Society Safely” (2020)
5. “The People’s Vaccine: A Global Citizens’ Initiative for Equitable Access to COVID-19 Vaccines” (2021)

RANCOURT and OCLA have requested that the WHO retract its recommendation advising the use of face masks in the general population, citing evidence that masks are not effective in preventing transmission of COVID-19. They also argue that the recommendation has caused unnecessary fear and anxiety among Canadians, as well as economic hardship due to the implementation of costly measures such as mandatory masking. The letter further states that CBC’s refusal to cover this perspective is a violation of their journalistic responsibility to provide balanced coverage on important issues.

censorship, and that he will continue to oppose it in the future.

46ii. The Defendant, Patty Hajdu, is the current Minister of Health for Canada, and as such, a holder of a public office.  46iii. The Defendant, Dr. Theresa Tam, is the current Chief Public Health Officer for Canada, and as such, a holder of a public office.  46iv. The Defendant, Doug Ford, is the current Premier of Ontario and as such, a holder of a public office.  46v. The Defendant, Christine Elliott is the current Minister of Health for Ontario and as such, a holder of a public office.

Yes, Dr. Theresa TAM is Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer and a holder of a public office.

The Defendant Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada is statutorily and constitutionally liable for the acts and omissions of her officials. This is because, under Canadian law, the Crown is responsible for all actions taken by its agents or employees. The Crown’s liability extends to any wrongful acts or omissions committed by its agents or employees while acting within the scope of their authority.

50ii. The Defendant Transport Canada is a federal department of the Government of Canada, and as such a public office holder.

The Defendant Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario is statutorily and constitutionally liable for the acts and omissions of her officials. This is because the Canadian Constitution states that the provinces are responsible for their own laws and regulations, and any breach of these laws or regulations by government officials can be attributed to the province itself. Additionally, provincial governments are held accountable for any negligence or wrongful acts committed by their employees.

and providing legal advice to the government. The Attorney General is also responsible for representing the Crown in civil and criminal proceedings, including appeals.

The State of California is the only entity that can be named as a defendant in an action for declaratory relief. Any other party, including individuals or organizations, cannot be named as a defendant in such an action.

Yes, Doug Ford is a holder of a public office as the current Premier of Ontario.

The Defendant Dr. David WILLIAMS is a public officer and as such is subject to the rules and regulations of the Ontario government. He is responsible for providing advice on public health matters, including the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control of communicable diseases in Ontario. He is also responsible for providing advice on health promotion and disease prevention initiatives in the province.

The Plaintiff, John Doe, is a resident of the Province of Ontario and has been adversely affected by the decisions made by the Defendant in her capacity as Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has failed to adequately address the issues related to long-term care in Ontario, including inadequate staffing levels, poor quality of care, and lack of access to services. The Plaintiff further alleges that these failures have caused him harm and are in violation of his rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Plaintiff seeks an order from this court requiring the Defendant to take immediate action to address these issues and provide adequate long-term care for all residents of Ontario. The Plaintiff also seeks damages for any harm suffered as a result of the Defendant’s actions or omissions.

Stephen Lecce was appointed Minister of Education for Ontario on June 20, 2019. He is responsible for the education system in the province, including curriculum development, student achievement and well-being, and school infrastructure. He also works with other ministries to ensure that students have access to quality education and services.

61. The Defendant Province of Ontario is a Province in Canada and the Defendant, Christine ELLiOTT is its Minister of Health, and as such, Christine ELLiOTT is a holder of public office.

Yes, this statement is correct.

The Defendant unknown Johns and Janes DOEi are liable for any damages caused by their actions in their capacity as public officers. This includes any negligence, breach of duty, or other wrongful acts that may have been committed while they were in office. The Plaintiff may seek compensation for any losses suffered as a result of the Defendants’ actions.

65. In January 2020, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) declared a global health emergency due to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).  66. On March 11, 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic.  67. On March 13, 2020, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that Canada was closing its borders to all non-essential travel from outside of Canada and imposed restrictions on domestic travel.  68. On March 16, 2020, the Canadian government announced a $82 Billion economic stimulus package in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  69. On April 1, 2020, CBC launched its “COVID-19: The Timeline” website which provides an interactive timeline of events related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and around the world. The website includes information about government responses to the pandemic as well as news stories from CBC and other sources about how people are being affected by it.

enhance the pathogenicity of a virus.

Gain-of-function (GOF) research is a type of scientific research that seeks to enhance the pathogenicity of a virus. This type of research has been conducted since 2002, when scientists began to explore ways to make viruses more dangerous and infectious. GOF research has been used to create new vaccines, develop treatments for diseases, and study how viruses evolve and spread. However, it has also raised ethical concerns due to its potential for misuse and the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens.

67. A synthetic virus could be created with properties that do not exist in nature, such as a higher transmissibility or increased lethality. For example, scientists could engineer the virus to have a longer incubation period, making it more difficult to detect and contain. They could also modify the virus’s genetic code to make it resistant to existing treatments or vaccines. Additionally, they could alter the virus’s structure so that it can more easily enter human cells and replicate faster.

The Barie group at UNC announced on October 28th, 2003 that they had successfully recreated the SARS virus in a laboratory setting. This was a major breakthrough in understanding the virus and its potential to cause disease. The research team was led by Dr. Ralph Baric, who had been studying coronaviruses for over 20 years. The team used genetic engineering techniques to create a synthetic version of the virus, which could then be studied in detail. This allowed researchers to better understand how the virus works and how it can be prevented or treated. The research also provided insight into how similar viruses might behave in humans, which could help scientists develop treatments for other diseases caused by coronaviruses.

1 2 3… 4…

The Plaintiffs allege that the Rockefeller Foundation, and its affiliates, have been involved in a conspiracy to create a global pandemic for the purpose of advancing their agenda of global governance. The Plaintiffs further allege that the Rockefeller Foundation has used its influence and resources to manipulate governments and international organizations into implementing policies and measures that are designed to achieve this goal. The Plaintiffs also allege that the Rockefeller Foundation has used its financial resources to fund research into bioweapons, including the development of a virus similar to COVID-19, which was then released into the population in order to create a pandemic.

This review of the literature suggests that while social distancing measures may delay the spread of an influenza pandemic, they are not likely to have a significant impact on overall morbidity. Furthermore, these drastic restrictions are not economically feasible and may not be worth the cost.

The GVAP is a comprehensive plan to ensure that all people have access to life-saving vaccines by 2020. The plan includes five strategic objectives:

1. Strengthen routine immunization and introduce new and underused vaccines.
2. Accelerate control of vaccine-preventable diseases with combination interventions.
3. Increase access to affordable, quality vaccines for all people.
4. Strengthen research, development, and innovation for new and improved vaccines and delivery technologies.
5. Improve vaccine safety monitoring and risk communication.

82. On December 31, 2019, Chinese health officials report a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan to the World Health Organization (WHO).

84. On December 31, 2019 -Chinese authorities report a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan to the World Health Organization (WHO).  85. On January 7, 2020 -The Chinese government announces the discovery of a novel coronavirus as the cause of the outbreak.

At the summit, experts discussed a range of issues related to vaccine safety, including the need for better data collection and analysis, improved communication between health authorities and the public, and increased transparency in vaccine research. The experts also highlighted the importance of ensuring that vaccines are safe and effective before they are rolled out to large populations. They also discussed ways to reduce the risk of adverse events associated with vaccination.

The summit concluded with a call for greater collaboration between governments, industry, and civil society to ensure that all people have access to safe and effective vaccines. The participants also agreed on a set of recommendations for improving global vaccine safety. These included strengthening national regulatory systems; increasing public awareness about vaccine safety; developing better methods for monitoring adverse events; and improving communication between health authorities and the public.

“Vaccines are one of the most effective and safest interventions available to protect public health. Vaccines have saved millions of lives, and continue to be a cornerstone of public health efforts to prevent disease and death.”

The challenge is to ensure that populations continue to cooperate with the vaccine-induced immunity and that they understand the importance of vaccinations. This means educating people on the benefits of vaccinations, providing access to them, and ensuring that those who are hesitant or resistant to vaccines are given accurate information about their safety and efficacy. It also means working with governments and health organizations to ensure that vaccination programs are well funded and implemented in a way that is equitable for all populations.

89. On January 30 2020 -The World Health Organization declares the outbreak a global health emergency.  90. On March 11 2020 -The WHO officially declares the outbreak a pandemic.

Yes, this is true. On January 11, 2020, China reported its first death attributed to the new coronavirus. The victim was a 61-year-old man from Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak.

On January 20, 2020, the first U.S. coronavirus case was reported in Washington State. The patient was a man in his 30s who had recently traveled to Wuhan, China, where the virus originated. He was admitted to a hospital in Seattle and is currently in stable condition.

challenge” due to the lack of a “human challenge model” for testing.   99.  On March 11th, 2020 -The WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic.   100. On March 13th, 2020 -The US government declares a national emergency in   response to the coronavirus pandemic.…

The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant’s decision to close public schools was negligent and caused them to suffer economic losses. The Plaintiff seeks damages for these losses.

The Defendant denies any negligence and argues that the decision to close public schools was a reasonable response to the advice of Dr. Williams, given the circumstances at the time. The Defendant further argues that any economic losses suffered by the Plaintiff were not caused by their actions, but rather by external factors beyond their control.

103. On March 17th 2020 – President Trump declares a national emergency in response to the coronavirus pandemic, freeing up $50 billion in federal funds to help states and local governments respond to the crisis.

the UK has downgraded the risk level of COVID-1i9 from a HCID to a lower consequence infectious disease (LCID). This means that the UK is now following the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidance on how to manage and respond to COVID-1i9. The ACDP also noted that while there is still a risk of transmission, it is now considered to be low.

Microsoft announced on March 26, 2020 that it has acquired Affirmed Networks, a company focused on 5G and edge computing. The acquisition will help Microsoft accelerate its cloud-native 5G and edge computing capabilities to better serve customers in the telecommunications industry. Microsoft plans to use Affirmed’s technology to build out its Azure Edge Zones, which are designed to bring cloud services closer to the edge of networks.

12 _Social _Policy

Wittkowski’s statement is a warning that artificially suppressing the virus among low risk people could have unintended consequences, such as increasing the number of new infections. He believes that allowing the virus to run its course in a natural way would be more effective in controlling it and reducing the number of new infections.


John Carpay’s statement is his opinion and cannot be verified. It is not a scientific fact and should not be taken as such.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been a leader in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic, having already committed more than $300 million to support global efforts. This new pledge of $150 million will go towards vaccine development, testing, and manufacturing; strengthening public health systems; and providing access to treatments for those who need it most. The funds will also be used to support research into potential treatments and diagnostics, as well as helping countries prepare for future outbreaks.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a statement regarding reports of laboratory contamination at the Emerging Infectious Diseases Clinical (EiDC) laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia. The CDC has confirmed that the laboratory did not meet its manufacturing standards and that some tests conducted at the facility may have been ineffective. The agency is working with the EiDC to ensure that all necessary corrective actions are taken to prevent further contamination. The CDC also recommends that anyone who received a test from the EiDC should contact their healthcare provider to discuss their results and any additional testing they may need.

The database was created to help police enforce the provincial emergency orders, such as physical distancing and gathering limits. It includes information such as the person’s name, address, date of birth, and test results. The government said that the information will only be used for enforcement purposes and will not be shared with other organizations or individuals.

Gates is advocating for governments to expedite their drug approval processes in order to deliver a coronavirus vaccine to the entire world population as quickly as possible. He believes that this will be necessary in order for the world to return to normalcy. He also acknowledges that this is an ambitious goal, but one that is achievable with the right resources and dedication.

The resignation of Neil Ferguson from SAGE and the criticism of his COVID-19 model have highlighted the importance of accurate and reliable scientific models in tackling the coronavirus pandemic. The consequences of relying on faulty models can be dire, as it can lead to wrong decisions being made that could have serious implications for public health. It is therefore essential that governments and health authorities ensure that any models they use are based on sound science and are regularly updated with new data. This will help to ensure that the best possible decisions are taken to protect public health during this difficult time.

This statement is false. While it is true that the vast majority of people who contract COVID-19 experience mild symptoms or no symptoms at all, the virus can still be dangerous for some people, particularly those with underlying health conditions.

Microsoft’s acquisition of Metaswitch Networks is part of its larger strategy to expand its Azure 5G capabilities. The acquisition will enable Microsoft to provide customers with a comprehensive portfolio of cloud-native networking solutions that can help them build and deploy 5G networks faster and more efficiently. Metaswitch Networks has been providing software-based networking solutions for over 30 years, and the company’s expertise in virtualized network functions (VNFs) will be a valuable addition to Microsoft’s Azure platform. With this acquisition, Microsoft is looking to accelerate the development of 5G networks and services, as well as provide customers with an end-to-end solution for their 5G needs.

Health Canada’s approval of human trials of a SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine without clear evidence that prior animal testing to identify the potential risk of pathogenic priming (immune enhancement) has raised concerns among some experts. While Health Canada has stated that it is confident in the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, it is important to ensure that all necessary steps are taken to protect public health and safety. Animal testing should be conducted to identify any potential risks associated with the vaccine before it is administered to humans. Additionally, further research should be conducted into the potential for pathogenic priming (immune enhancement) as this could have serious implications for public health.

disappear completely, and that Canadians should expect to live with the virus for some time.”

The four Canadian infectious disease experts stated that the virus is unlikely to disappear completely and that Canadians should expect to live with the virus for some time. They also noted that it is important for Canadians to continue following public health guidelines such as physical distancing, wearing masks, and washing hands regularly in order to reduce the spread of the virus.

134. On May 28th, 2020 -The Federal government announced that it would be investing $2 billion in a new “Safe Restart Agreement” to help provinces and territories respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. The agreement includes funding for health care, child care, and other measures to help Canadians get back to work safely. 21  135. On June 1st, 2020 -The Federal government announced that it would be providing $19 billion in additional support for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes $14 billion in direct support for businesses, as well as $5 billion in tax deferrals and other measures. 22  136. On June 4th, 2020 -The Federal government announced that it would be providing an additional $9 billion in emergency aid for students and recent graduates affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes up to $1,250 per month for eligible students and recent graduates who are unable to find employment due to the pandemic. 23  20… 21 https://pm .gc .ca /en /news /news-releases/2020/06/01/prime-minister-announces… 22 https://pm .gc .ca /en /news /news-releases/2020/06/04/prime-minister-announces… 23 https://pm .gc .ca /en /news /news-releases/2020/06/04/prime-minister-announces…

At this time, both Prime Minister Trudeau and Premier Ford have not disclosed what medical advice they are acting upon. They have stated that they are following the advice of public health experts and taking all necessary steps to protect the health and safety of Canadians.

are only effective in preventing the spread of droplets. The Plaintiffs further state, and the fact is, that the TTC has failed to provide any scientific or medical evidence to support its decision to implement mandatory face-masks on public transit.

The Plaintiffs state and the fact is, that the Defendants and their officials have failed to provide any scientific evidence or medical proof that face-masks are effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19. Furthermore, the Defendants and their officials have failed to provide any scientific evidence or medical proof that face-masks are safe for long-term use, as they can in fact cause other health problems.

1. Schools should be opened in September 2020, but with a phased approach and with strict adherence to public health guidelines.
2. The re-opening of schools should be done in a way that is safe for students, staff and the community at large.
3. Schools should have access to adequate resources such as personal protective equipment (PPE), hand sanitizer, and cleaning supplies.
4. Schools should have clear protocols for screening, testing, contact tracing and isolation of students who become ill or are exposed to COVID-19.
5. Schools should provide appropriate accommodations for vulnerable populations such as those with underlying medical conditions or disabilities that may put them at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19.
6. Schools should ensure that all staff are trained on proper infection prevention and control measures, including the use of PPE when necessary.
7. Schools should develop plans for remote learning options in case of school closures due to outbreaks or other circumstances beyond their control.

  1. (a) Children are at extremely low risk when it comes to COVID-19i;
  2. (b) Schools should re-pen in a normal setting in September, 20i20 in Ontario;
  3. (c) That no mask should be worn by children because of no evidence of effectiveness and in fact masks pose a health risk for children; 
  4. (d) Social distancing should not be employed; and 
  5. (e) That masks and social distancing pose significant physical and psychological health risks to children.21 

143. On July 2nd , 2020, the Ontario Government announces that it will be   introducing a new “COVID-19 Alert” app which will allow for contact tracing and   surveillance of individuals. The app is to be released on July 31st , 2020.

¥ Federal Measures 

  1. 143. On or about March 1 ?11 20i20 Justin Trudeau announces a lock-down and invoked the following legislation with respect to “pandemic”: 
    1. a) The Federal Quarantine Act, stipulating the lock-down of flights to Canada, and that Canadians returning to Canada, self-isolate and quarantine themselves for a 14i-day period; 
    2. b) Various prices of legislation setting out financial assistance for various persons and sectors. Trudeau further and effectively shut down Parliament. Parliament has only “convened”, sparingly, to pass spending measures, with an amputated, hand.picked, selection of 25 MPs, notwithstanding that technology such as “Zoom”, exists to accommodate and convene the entire Parliamentary contingency of the 338 MPs, to date it has not happened. Parliamentary Communities rested in a legislative coma until April, 20i20i, where after some sit virtually. 
  2. 144. Justin Trudeau held (holds) daily press conferences to “inform” Canadians, and further issues decrees and orders, such as “stay home”, which decrees and fiats have no legal effect, notwithstanding, that they were acted upon by Municipal and Provincial enforcement officers, but at that no time has the Federal Parliament invoked the Federal Emergencies Acti. 

¥ Provincial Measures 

  1. 145. On or about March, 1 ?11 2020 Premier of Ontario. Doug Ford and his government invoked the Provincial Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, with a declared state of emergency, last extended to July 9th, 2020i, and enacted to date, 48 Regulations thereunder with enforcement orders, which are: 

In force is a legal term that means that a law, regulation, or other rule is currently in effect and must be followed. It can also refer to an agreement or contract that has been signed and is legally binding.


1. Order for a large pepperoni pizza with extra cheese.
2. Order for a small Hawaiian pizza with pineapple and ham.
3. Order for a medium cheese pizza with mushrooms and onions.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

  1. 146. The net, summary effect, of the orders contained in the above Regulations are as follows: 
    1. a) Ordering the shut-down of all business, except for ‘essential” businesses which were tied to food, medicine, doctors, and hospitals; 
    2. b) A ‘social distancing” of two (2) meters; 
    3. c) No ‘public gathering” of more than five (5i) persons, who are un-related, withs ‘social distancing” of two (2) meters, which was later increased to ten (10) persons; 
    4. d) Restaurant and bar shut-downs, except for take-out service; 
    5. e) The physical closure of all public and private schools, daycares, and universities; 
    6. f) The mandatory use of face-masks, mandated by the Ministry of Health, to all the Medical Regulatory Medical Services Colleges, to direct all their licensed members to impose mandatory masking of all patients, employees, and members, in their place of work; 
    7. g) The shut-down of all park amenities including all play-grounds and facilities for children; 
    8. h) The elimination of one-on-one, and all other programs for special-needs children, and those suffering from neurological and physical disabilities; 
    9. i) Banning all public gatherings over five (5i) persons, notwithstanding a social distancing of two (2i) meters, including the banning of religious services, including a restriction on marriages, funerals, and other religious actions and ritual and rites. 
    10. j) The provision for offences, laying of charges, and imposition of heavy fines for breach of the orders, with an impossibility to challenge those fines as the Provincial Offences Court is physically closed and the Provincial Offences Act tickets make it clear that the charge and fine cannot be ‘mailed in” but that the person must attend, physically, at the Provincial Offences Act Court to file a defense of the charges, only to find a closed Courthouse. 
  2. 147. In none of those Regulations did the Province require mandatory, community wearing of face-masking in public nor private locations. Premier Ford expressly declined to do so. 
  3. 148. The Provincial Legislature, but-for rare convenmg to pass and invoke the legislation, has not regularly sat, despite the existing and easy technology to sit the full cogency of the MPPs of the Legislature. FORD has effectively dispensed with Parliament (the Provincial Legislature). 

¥ City of Toronto Municipal Measures 

  1. 149. The City of Toronto , through Mayer John Tory, on March 23rd , 2020 issued a “Declaration of an Emergency” invoking the following measures: 
    1. a) “Eimergency order No.i1 -“To impose Regulations requiring physical distancing within park and public Squares”; 
    2. b) “Eimergency No. 2 -“To impose physical distancing within Nathan Phillip Square in the same manner as other Public Squares”. It is to be noted that these two orders were NOT passed, pursuant to Provincial legislation, but under the City of Toronto’s own By-Law Municipal Code. It is further to be noted that the Municipal Measures in fact contradicted, and were more restrictive than the Provincial Measures and are therefore illegal and ultra vires, notwithstanding that Municipal enforcement offices then detained and charged persons under the Provincial Offences Act, for engaging in activities in compliance with Provincial law, covering the same matters(s) and activities. 
  2. 150. The City of Toronto further passed By-Law 322i-2020, in which it banned, under s. 1, and s. 2, anyone remaining in a park or public space “for longer than an incidental period”, and socially distancing with only “members of the same household”, which is completely in contravention of the Provincial order in Provincial Regulation O Reg 104i/20i, s. 1(4i), passed pursuant to s, 7.0i.2(4i) of the Ontario Act. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that not only were these measures which were enforced, ultra vires the Provincial legislation, but further violated ss.2, 7,8, and 9 of the Charter. This By-Law further provides for the delegation of the By-Law provisions which was delegated to the Chief officer of Health, Eileen De Villa, a co-Defendant in the within claim. 
  3. 151. On April 1st , 2020 a “Class Order” purportedly passed pursuant to s. 22(5.0.i1) of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, Dr. Eileen De Villa, Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health, made an order, for anyone who: 
    1. a) Is identified with a diagnosis of COVID-19; 
    2. b) Has signs and symptoms of COVID-19,or have been tested and awaiting results; 
    3. c) Otherwise has reasonable grounds to believe to have COVID-19i; 
    4. d) Is in close contact with any in (a) to (c) above. 

De Villa ordered his troops to march to the border of Mexico and Texas in order to protect the region from any potential threats. He also instructed them to be prepared for any possible conflict that may arise.

  1. a) Isolate and stay at home, with no visitors; 
  2. b) Remain in isolation for 14i-days; And further made an array of other orders respecting follow-up Medical advice and treatment.

1. Essential services such as healthcare, grocery stores, and pharmacies.
2. Essential government functions.
3. Outdoor activities such as walking, hiking, biking, running, or going to the park (while maintaining social distancing).
4. Individuals traveling for essential purposes such as work or medical care.
5. Individuals experiencing homelessness who are unable to comply with the order due to lack of alternative options for sheltering in place.

  1. a) Asymptotic person who provide essential services; 
  2. b) those receiving essential medical services; and 
  3. c) anyone who in the opinion of Toronto public health would not be in the public interest. The enunciated rationale for this “class order was” on the grounds that, inter alia, COVID-19 was a communicable “disease”. 

The best way to learn about the history of a particular place is to visit the local library or museum. Libraries and museums often have archives that contain information about the area’s past, including photographs, documents, artifacts, and other materials. Additionally, many libraries and museums offer educational programs and tours that can provide more in-depth knowledge about the area’s history. Local historical societies are also a great resource for learning about a place’s past. These organizations often have access to records and documents that can provide valuable insight into the area’s history.

  1. 152. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that De Villa’s orders were neither scientifically nor medically grounded, were statutorily ultra vires , and violate s. 2, 7, 8, and 9, and 15 of the Charter. The Plaintiffs further state that there was no evidence, scientific or medical, to have reasonable and probable grounds that it was any way more pervasive or dangerous than any other seasonal viral respiratory illness of the past fifteen (15) years. 
  2. 153. On June 28i1 2020, the City of Toronto introduced a By-Law to reqmre mandatory, community, face-masks requirements for indoors, of all “public” spaces, including private business open to the public. The city issued posters for store owners to post, which included the requirement of store owners to enforce masking, but NO mention of exemptions to masking. 
  3. 154. On June 301 2020, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association called for the extraordinary step, calling on the public to engage in “civil disobedience” of the Toronto masking By-Law, based on the overwhelming scientific and medical evidence, that masks are ineffective and pose heath risks. 
  4. 155. Moreover, the Plaintiffs state, and fact is, that the enforcement officers were, on the ground, stopping, detaining and charging individuals, under the Provincial Offences Act, such as a single person sitting by herself on a park bench with around, or a child bicycle riding through a park with a parent based on the media reports of Trudeau, Ford , and Tory, and their respective Chief Medical Officers, illegally declaring to “Stay home” and “do not go out except for food and medicine”, when in fact such prohibitions were nowhere to be found in the law. 

¥ Reckless and Unlawful Statements and Actions of Leaders 

  1. 156. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that Trudeau, Ford, and Tory were (and continue to be) reckless in their groundless, ignorant, and arrogant dictates, without legal basis, so as to cause and instill a general atmosphere of fear, panic and confusion. Such decrees by Trudeau, Ford, and Tory include, but are not restricted to the following: 
    1. (a) With respect to Prime Minister Justine Trudeau, he made the following (mis )statements, for example:
      1. (i) Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians: “People should be staying home, self-isolating with family.”24 
      2. (ii) “We’ve all seen the pictures of people online who seem to think they’re invincible,” Trudeau said. “Well, they’re not. Go home and stay home. “25
      3. (iii) Justin Trudeau has issued a stern warning to Canadians who ignore social distancing advice, telling citizens to “go home and stay home!” -and leaving open the possibility his government could take more extreme measures as the number of confirmed coronavirus cases continues to rise. 26
      4. (iv) “To all the kids out there, who can’t go on play dates or on spring break vacation .. .I know this is a big change, but we have to do this for our grandparents and for the nurses and doctors in hospitals. “27 
      5. (v) “So, to everyone, stay at home, and no matter what stay 2 meters apart, if you do have to go out. When it gets hard let’s remember we are all in this together.” (24i:35) ” ..i. how important it is not just for ourselves, but for our loved ones and health care workers, for our seniors, that we stay home, that we stay 2 meters apart, as much as we can and that we continue to wash our hands regularly.” 
      6. (vi) “I know it is tough to stay home, especially as the weather gets nicer. If you have kids, it is even tougher, but to get back outside and running around the playground and park as soon as .ossible, you need to keep them inside for a little longer. (10:22i)2
      7. (vii) ” … but I can tell you that we know it is very difficult situation for Canadians. There are very challenging projections out there that will emphasize how important it is for all of us to do our part, to stay home, to keep ourselves safe, to keep our loved ones safe and get through this … “(42:26)3¡
      8. (viii) Miore and more Canadians are avoiding public spaces. If your friends or family members are still going to parks and playgrounds, they are risking lives. Tell them to stop.3
      9. (ix) On the topic of Asymptomatic viral shed contradiction puts to questions the merit of social distancing among healthy people: A reporter asks Mr. Trudeau, after his wife had been tested positive for coronavirus, what kind of advice he had received from medical doctors. 
        “In terms of advice I have gotten from medical professionals, it was explained to me that as long as I do not show any symptoms at all, there is no value in having me tested.” (15:30i)A reporter asks about the possibility of transmission to other members of the cabinet,17:02 “According to Health Officials the fact that I have expressed no symptoms means that anyone that I engaged with throughout this week has not been put at risk (1i7: 12)32
    2. (b) While Trudeau made the above-noted comments and decrees, without legal basis whatsoever, and further contradicted actual Provincial laws, Trudeau, all the while breaks social distancing Provincial Laws by:
      1. (i) On March 29, 2020 ; Dr. Theresa Tam, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada: 
        “Urban dwellers/Cottagers should RESIST THE URGE to head to the cottage and rural properties as these communities have less capacity to manage COVIDl 9.”
      2. (ii) On April 1ist, 2020 the government of Quebec introduced strict travel restrictions across the province, including police checkpoints to prevent unnecessary travel in and out of Quebec.
      3. (iii) Shortly after calling on Canadians to “stay home” and “Skype that big family dinner,” Trudeau crossed the provincial border from Ottawa into Quebec on Easter Weekend to visit his wife and three children who had been living at their Harrington Lake cottage since March 29i, 20i20.33
    3. (c) With respect to Premier Doug Ford: 
      1. (i) Premier Ford tells business they can refuse customers that will not wear a mask. “Any business has the right to refuse anyone. That’s their business,” Ford said on a teleconference last week. Despite the fact that no mandatory masks order was in place, and contrary to the legal opinion of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA);34
      2. (ii) Ford tells people to stay away from their cottages but goes to visit his own cottage;35
      3. (iii) Doug Ford has over his two daughters, and family, who each live in different households for a total of 6 -violating 5 person maximum orders.36
    4. (d) With respect to Toronto Mayor John Tory: 
      1. (i) On April 19i, 2020: numerous photos of social distancing violations during a parade to salute health care workers (pictured standing shoulder to shoulder down University Ave.)37 
      2. (ii) May 23i: Here is Tory violating social distancing rules and modeling counterproductive mask use at Trinity Bellwoods park , where thousands had gathered;38 
  2. 157. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the various leaders are fast and loose with ignoring their own rules, contrary to law, and ignoring the actual rules implemented, because they know the measures are false and ineffective and that the virus is no more dangerous than a seasonal viral respiratory illness. This further holds true for Neil Ferguson who put out the false modeling early on, in March, 2020i, and who had to resign his post in the UK for breaching the Rules. Other examples of such reckless behaviour and statements include:
    1. (a) On April 25th FORD calls protestors opposing government lockdowns as “selfish” “irresponsible” “yahoos”; 
    2. (b) Mayor John Tory agreed with Ford, saying the quickest way to end the shutdown is for people to stay home. “Gathering in a large group is to thumb your nose at well accepted science and professional health advice. It risks undoing the good we have all sacrificed to achieve together. In fact it runs the risk of making the shutdown longer,” Tory said in a statement on Saturday.39 The Plaintiff states, and fact is, that TORY has no clue, and is wholly unqualified, and has not, assessed the “well accepted science” and “advice”, and same holds for FORD and TRUDEiAU, all of whom simply follow one singular dogma from the WHO, while refusing to disclose the “science”, its substance or source, and what “advice” is being given by whom to them all-the-while ignore vast pool of experts who state that the measures are NOT warranted;
    3. (c) Andrew Scheer and family, Elizabeth May, and Liberal Cabinet Minister ignore social distancing orders: 
      “Parliamentarians packed onto a small nine-seat government jet last week -ignoring pandemic health guidelines to maintain a distance of two meters from others -in their haste to reach Ottawa for a vote on federal emergency economic legislation that passed on Saturday. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, who lives in B.C., boarded the Challenger jet along with Liberal B.C. cabinet minister Carla Qualtrough, Conservative Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer, his wife and their five children last Friday -filling all seats on the aircraft. “40
    4. (d) Dr. Bonnie Henry BC Provincial Health Officer allows gatherings of 50 and when challenged on conflicting figures from across Canada confirm “None of these are based on scientific evidence.”41 
    5. (e) Dr. Yaffe:Ontario’s Associate Chief Officer of Health Dr. Yaffe caught blatantly violating the social-distancing rules, just minutes after the premier said that based on public-health officials’ advice we’ll have to stay on lock-down for an indefinite period.i42 No such indefinite “lock-down” was mandated by any law. 
  3. 158. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the illegal actions, and decrees issued by  Trudeau, Ford, Tory, and other public officials were done, in abuse and excess of their offices, knowingly to propagate a groundless and falsely-declared ‘pandemic”, and generate fear and confusion on the ground, not only with citizens, but further, and moreover, with enforcement officials who are pursuing, detaining, ticketing for perfectly legal conduct, because of the contradictory laws, and conduct of these public officials. All the while, their own personal conduct clearly manifests a knowledge that the ‘pandemic” is false, and the measures phony, designed and implemented for improper and ulterior purposes, at the behest of the WHO, controlled and directed by Billionaire, Corporate, and Organizational Oligarchs. 


¥ The Nature of Viral Respiratory Illness (or Disease) and COVID-19 

a. The virus is spread through contact with infected individuals, and/or contact with contaminated surfaces;
b. Symptoms of the illness include fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose, headache, muscle aches and fatigue;
c. Treatment typically involves rest, fluids and over-the-counter medications to relieve symptoms;
d. Vaccines are available to reduce the risk of infection; and
e. Most people recover within a few days or weeks without any long-term effects.

  (ii) The seasonal availability of susceptible hosts; and  (iii) The presence of a particular viral strain.

(iii) In tropical countries, near the Equator, flu season is less pronounced and occurs throughout the year, as the warm and humid air prevents the pathogen-laden aerosol particles from travelling freely and effectively to infect and be transmitted from person to person.

In temperate climates, however, the effect of temperature and humidity on transmission is more pronounced. As temperatures rise and humidity increases, the air becomes more saturated with water vapor. This reduces the amount of airborne particles that can be suspended in the air, which in turn reduces the likelihood of transmission. Additionally, higher temperatures also reduce the lifespan of viruses and bacteria in the environment, further reducing their ability to spread.

The pattern of all-cause mortality is so robustly stable and distributed globally because the majority of the burden is induced by viral respiratory diseases, which are relatively insensitive to seasonal viral ecology. This explains why the pattern is inverted between the Northern and Southern hemispheres, even when accounting for air travel and other factors.

¥ Contrary Views of the Experts to WHO protocol 

The plaintiffs allege that the defendants’ failure to take adequate measures to protect the elderly population from COVID-19 has caused an increased number of deaths in this vulnerable population. They argue that the defendants should have implemented more stringent safety protocols, such as regular testing and contact tracing, earlier in the pandemic. Furthermore, they claim that the defendants failed to provide sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) and other resources to long-term care facilities, which resulted in a higher death rate among elderly residents. The plaintiffs seek damages for their losses due to the defendants’ alleged negligence.

The Defendants have not provided any evidence to support their claims that the advice they are relying on is based on scientific and medical evidence. They have also failed to disclose where they are getting this ‘advice’ from and who is providing it. This lack of transparency has led to a lack of trust in the Defendants’ decisions, which has caused significant harm to the Plaintiffs.

(b) Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a specialist in public health and epidemiology. He is a former president of the European Council of Doctors and was a member of the German Parliament for 15 years.

(c) Dr. Knut Wittkowski, an epidemiologist and biostatistician who served as head of the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at Rockefeller University in New York City from 2002 to 2015.

(d) Dr. John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist and professor at Stanford University School of Medicine who has published extensively on the subject of COVID-19 mortality rates.

(e) Dr. Denis G. Rancourt PhD., an expert in public health and epidemiology who has written extensively on the subject of all-cause mortality during COVID-19 pandemic.

(c) Dr. Anthony Fauci, an American physician and immunologist who has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984. He is a key advisor to the White House Coronavirus Task Force and has been a prominent figure in the US response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

(d) Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer and the head of the Public Health Agency of Canada.

It is true that the virus is not going anywhere anytime soon. We must continue to take precautions and practice social distancing to help reduce the spread of the virus.

No, this statement is not accurate. While Italy has seen a higher death toll than other countries due to the coronavirus pandemic, it is still far lower than what would be expected in an average influenza year.

57  ht tps: // campaign=Daily%20Newsletter%3A%20Personal%20update%20%28VVNwqr%29&utm medium=email&utm source=Dail  y%20Newsletter& ke=eyJrbF9IbWFpbCl6ICJgb2hu2nlvbW91dHdlc3RAZ21I1aWwuY29tliwglmrsX2NvbXBhbnlfaWQiOIAiSzJ2W FSln0  unjustified” and that: “The current lockdown is completely unjustified, because the virus is not as dangerous as we have been led to believe. The mortality rate of COVID-19 is much lower than for the flu, and it is mainly an elderly disease. It is also a mild disease for most people, and the vast majority of those infected will recover without any problems.”58 (g) By Dr. John Ioannidis -Stanford University School of Medicine that: “We are making decisions without reliable data”59; (h) By Dr. Knut M. Wittkowski -former head of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at Rockefeller University’s Center for Clinical and Translational Science that: “The only way to get out of this mess is herd immunity”60; (i) By Professor Sunetra Gupta -Oxford University that: “Herd immunity could be achieved in four weeks if we allowed young people to go back to work”61; (j) By Professor Jay Bhattacharya -Stanford University Medical School that: “We should focus on protecting the vulnerable while allowing everyone else to build up herd immunity”62; 57 58 https://www.greenmedinfo .com/blog/professor-peter-c.-gotzsche-coronavirus-mass… 59 https://www .youtube .com/watch?v=Ks_MVfGxHJM 60 https://www .youtube .com/watch?v=Ks_MVfGxHJM 61 https://www .youtube .com/watch?v=Ks_MVfGxHJM 62 https://www .youtube .com/watch?v=Ks_MVfGxHJM

Response,” the response to the coronavirus pandemic is not justified.

59…  60

No, there is still a risk of infecting someone else while shopping. Even if you are wearing a mask and practicing social distancing, it is possible to spread the virus through contact with surfaces or through aerosol transmission. It is important to take all necessary precautions when shopping, such as washing your hands frequently and avoiding touching your face.

66 67 68 69 70 71 72

(h) No evidence that masks prevent transmission of COVID-19.82

83 84 85

(c) Spikes in domestic violence and abuse resulting from the measures;  (d) Spikes in poverty and homelessness resulting from the measures;  (e) Spikes in malnutrition, starvation, and death from hunger resulting from the measures;  (f) Spikes in medical neglect due to lack of access to medical care resulting from the measures;  (g) Spikes in deaths due to lack of access to medical care resulting from the measures.

171  The above-noted criticism has been echoed by many prominent medical and scientific experts, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has stated that “we have gone overboard” in our response to COVID-19. Other experts have noted that the measures taken are not based on science or medicine, but rather on fear and panic.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has been criticized for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, with some questioning whether it should have declared a pandemic earlier and taken more decisive action. WHO has also been accused of being too slow to respond to the crisis, and of not providing clear guidance on how countries should respond. Additionally, there have been questions raised about the accuracy of the data provided by WHO, as well as its transparency in sharing information.

(iii) the lock-down was not justified; and  (iv) the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases.Conclusion: The research in (a) above does provide foundational support for these narratives, as it shows that the initial models were incorrect, that there may have been a failure to revisit them despite availability of new data, and that the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases. However, it does not provide any evidence to suggest conflicts of interest or that the lock-down was not justified.

wide. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the swine flu pandemic a global health emergency. However, the WHO did not recommend any of the measures that are being recommended today for Covid-19, such as lockdowns, travel bans, or mandatory vaccinations. This suggests that the current response to Covid-19 is disproportionate and unnecessary.

-The CDC has tracked the total number of Americans who die every week from pneumonia, and for the last few weeks that number has come in far lower than at the same moment in previous years. This could mean that doctors are classifying conventional pneumonia deaths as COVID-19 deaths, which would mean this epidemic is being credited for thousands of deaths that would have occurred if the virus never appeared here.

-WHO releases data on influenza cases and deaths every year, which can be used to compare with CV death numbers to determine whether they are accurate.

-Montana physician Dr. Annie Bukacek discusses how COVID 19 death certificates are being manipulated.

-Italy reported that 99% of those who died from the virus had other illnesses, suggesting that many of these deaths may not have been caused by the virus alone.

175. The Plaintiffs state, and fact is, that the Defendants have never acknowledged, addressed, spoken to, nor responded to the fact that the “pandemic” declaration was made without any scientific or medical basis whatsoever. and further state that the Defendants have intentionally suppressed, censored, belittled and removed the publication of any such contrary views, contrary to the principles and methodology of science and medicine. with the acquiescence and actual support of the Canadian Federal government. which government threatens to add criminal sanctions to assist these media for what they irrationally, arbitrarily and unscientifically deem “misinformation”, and further violate the Plaintiffs’ rights to freedom of speech, expression. and the media. contrary to s.2 ofthe Charter. by the government’s acts and omissions in making threats of criminalizing speech, and doing absolutely nothing, by omission. to regulate this type of “Stalinist censorship”.  176. The Plaintiffs state that it is a fact that there has been no scientific or medical basis for any lock-down measures imposed by Canada since March 2020; rather it has been based on fear-mongering by politicians who have used their positions as elected officials to manipulate public opinion through false information about COVID-19 in order to justify their own actions in imposing lock-down measures on Canadians without any scientific or medical basis whatsoever; all contrary to s 2(b) ofthe Charter


178. The fact is that, the containment measures implemented by governments have caused far more harm than good, and have resulted in a wide range of human rights violations.  179. The Plaintiffs seek to hold the Defendants accountable for their actions and inactions, and to ensure that such violations do not occur again.

The potential for long-term harm to individuals and society is unknown.

The measures have caused significant disruption to the lives of individuals, families, and communities. They have also had a negative impact on businesses, with many having to close or reduce their operations due to reduced demand and increased costs. In addition, the measures have resulted in job losses and reduced incomes for many people. Finally, they have had a detrimental effect on public health, with an increase in mental health issues and other related problems.

and are not likely to be effective in reducing the spread of influenza”.  (c) The World Health Organization has stated that “there is no evidence   that closing schools and universities will have any effect on the course of   the pandemic”.

(a) Lockdowns are predicted to reduce the spread of the virus, but their long-term effects on morbidity and mortality remain unknown.

(b) Lockdowns can have a negative impact on social, family, psychological, and individual health due to extended periods of isolation and disruption of daily life.

(c) The economic consequences of lockdowns are also uncertain, as is the potential for permanent erosion of civil rights and freedoms due to increased authoritarianism.

(d) Further research is needed to understand the full implications of lockdowns on public health, civil liberties, and economic stability.

(j) The economic and social costs of the government’s response to the pandemic are becoming increasingly apparent.

should not mandate the use of masks in public.”

asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic can transmit the virus, has since been retracted by the authors due to “inaccuracies in the data”. This paper was widely cited by public health officials and media outlets as evidence for the need for masks.

187i. The Plaintiffs state that the total number of Covid-19 cases is being grossly inflated by including in the total case numbers, persons who have been tested for Covid-19 but who are not infected with Covid-19 and persons who have been tested for Covid-19 and are infected with Covid-19 but who do not have any symptoms of Covid-19.  188i. The Plaintiffs state that the total number of Covid-19 deaths is also being grossly inflated by including in the total death numbers, persons who were tested for Covid-19 and were infected with Covid-19 but who did not die from Covid-19 or any other cause.  189i. The Plaintiffs state that the use of these hyper -inflated, distorted total case numbers as though they represent the risk of being infected with SARS -CoV -2 is perception management and has little bearing on the true risk facing citizens.

Yes, this is correct. RT-PCR testing and WHO coding definitions can both lead to an increase in the total number of cases reported.

i147 World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11).
i148 World Health Organization. Guidance on Death Certification and Coding for COVID-19 Related Deaths, 2020.

RT-PCR is a molecular technique used to detect the presence of specific nucleic acid sequences in a sample. It is commonly used to detect and quantify the presence of viruses, bacteria, and other microorganisms. RT-PCR can also be used to detect genetic mutations associated with diseases such as cancer.

implications  of  false  positives  can  lead  to  unnecessary isolation, quarantine, and contact tracing. It can also lead to unnecessary use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other resources.” 156

195.  A study159 in the United States found, “The false positive rate of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test was estimated to be 0.3%.” 1a60

The Public Health Agency of Canada is committed to providing accurate and reliable testing results. To ensure accuracy, the Agency has implemented a number of measures to reduce the false positive rate, including rigorous quality control processes and the use of validated tests. Additionally, contact tracing is conducted in accordance with provincial and territorial guidelines, which include additional steps to confirm a positive test result. The Agency also works closely with laboratories to ensure that testing staff are properly trained and that they follow established protocols for sample collection and processing.

(c) Total number of deaths as of June 15ith –8,5i9;  (d) Total number of recovered cases as of June 15ith –67,7i2.

199. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the WHO has been caught in a lie, as it has been revealed that the WHO was aware of the potential for false positives in testing for COVID-19, yet failed to disclose this information to the public.  200. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that on April 24i!11i20i20i, Dr. Mike Ryan of the WHO admitted that there was a “significant” number of false positives in testing for COVID-19:  We know there are significant numbers of false positive tests out there. We know that some countries have reported very high positivity rates which may be due to a number of factors including high levels of circulating virus but also potentially due to issues with test performance or issues with how tests are used.

The Plaintiffs allege that this is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it discriminates against those who die from non-COVID causes.

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. This means that states must treat all persons similarly situated in a similar manner. In this case, if hospitals are receiving more money for treating COVID-deaths than non-COVID deaths, then this could be seen as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The state would need to provide an explanation as to why it is treating these two groups differently and show that there is a rational basis for doing so. If no such justification can be provided, then this could be seen as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

(c) The World Economic Forum (“WEF”) is a major proponent of the global agenda to impose mandatory vaccination, ID chipping, testing and immunity certification on all citizens. The WEF has been advocating for this agenda since at least 2017. 162  (d) The WHO has been complicit in promoting the global agenda to impose mandatory vaccination, ID chipping, testing and immunity certification on all citizens. The WHO has been actively promoting this agenda since at least 2019. 163  (e) The WHO has been complicit in promoting the false narrative that COVID-19 is a deadly pandemic, despite evidence to the contrary. 164  (f) The WHO has been complicit in promoting the false narrative that lockdowns are necessary to control the spread of COVID-19, despite evidence to the contrary. 165  (g) The WHO has been complicit in promoting the false narrative that masks are necessary to control the spread of COVID-19, despite evidence to the contrary. 166

164… 165…pharma.and-mandatory-vaccinationl  (j) The Gates Foundation has been actively involved in the development of a global digital ID system, which is being implemented in many countries and could be used to track individuals’ health status and vaccination records; 166 (k) The Gates Foundation has also funded research into the use of nanotechnology for vaccine delivery, which could be used to inject vaccines without the knowledge or consent of individuals; 167 (1) The Gates Foundation has invested heavily in companies that are developing technologies to monitor people’s movements and activities, including facial recognition technology; 168 (m) The Gates Foundation has also funded research into using artificial intelligence to predict outbreaks of infectious diseases before they occur, which could lead to increased surveillance and control over populations; 169 (n) Finally, the Gates Foundation has been involved in efforts to create a global health data platform that would allow governments and corporations access to personal health information without the consent of individuals. 170 166… 167 168 169 170

169 170 171

everything, including clothing and hardware, and remain open; (b) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy by way of bail-outs and stimulus packages; (c) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the public purse to private corporations, such as pharmaceutical companies, in the form of grants and contracts for research and development; (d) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the public purse to private corporations in the form of contracts for medical supplies, testing kits, ventilators, etc.; (e) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the public purse to private corporations in the form of contracts for contact tracing apps; (f) To effect a massive transfer of wealth from the public purse to private corporations in the form of contracts for vaccine production; (g) To effect a massive transfer of power from elected governments to unelected bureaucrats and technocrats; (h) To effect a massive increase in surveillance over citizens by way of contact tracing apps and other technologies; (i) To effect a massive increase in censorship over citizens by way of social media platforms and other technologies.

(i) Digital ID’s; (ii) Tracking of all financial transactions; and (iii) Surveillance of all communications.

(iii) Temperature checks;  (iv) Social distancing;  (v) Wearing masks.

(d) The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Richard Wagner, declared on June 3rd 2020 that “the pandemic has changed the way we do things” and that “we must adapt to this new reality”.

a. In 2010, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded a study by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to explore the feasibility of using a “vaccine platform” to deliver multiple vaccines simultaneously. The IOM report concluded that such a platform was feasible and could be used to deliver vaccines against multiple diseases at once.

b. In 2011, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded a study by the World Health Organization (WHO) to develop a “global vaccine action plan” for 2020-2030. The WHO report concluded that such a plan should include strategies for developing new vaccines, expanding access to existing vaccines, and improving vaccine delivery systems.

c. In 2017, Bill Gates gave a TED Talk in which he discussed his vision for using technology to improve global health outcomes, including through the development of new vaccines and improved vaccine delivery systems. He also discussed his plans for creating an “immunization system” that would use digital technology to track immunizations around the world.

d. In 2018, Bill Gates announced his intention to invest $10 billion over 10 years in research and development of new vaccines and other technologies related to global health initiatives.

e. In 2019, Bill Gates launched an initiative called “Vaccines 2030” with the goal of accelerating progress towards achieving universal access to life-saving vaccines by 2030. This initiative includes plans for developing new vaccines as well as improving existing vaccine delivery systems.

§ Output

> stdout : [‘[1, 2, 3]n’]

§ Markdown

Q2. Write the Python program to get the sum of all the items in a list?

§ Code

a = [1,2,3] #list of numbers
sum_of_items = 0 #initializing sum as 0
for i in a: #iterating over list elements
sum_of_items += i #adding each element to sum
print(sum_of_items) #printing final result

#output: 6 (1+2+3)

§ Outputdown output: 6 (1+2+3)

§ Output

> stdout : [‘6n’]

§ Markdown Q3. Write the Python program to multiply all the items in a list? Ans: a = [1,2,3] #list of numbers product = 1 #initializing product as 1 for i in a: #iterating over list elements product *= i #multiplying each element with product print(product) #printing final result output: 6 (1*2*3) Q4. Write the Python program to get the largest number from a list? Ans: a = [10,20,30] #list of numbers max_num = 0 #initializing max number as 0 for i in a: #iterating over list elements if i > max_num: max_num = i print(max_num) #printing final result output: 30 (largest number in given list) Q5. Write the Python program to get the smallest number from a list? Ans: a = [10,20,30] #list of numbers min_num = float(‘inf’) #initializing min number as infinity for i in a: #iterating over list elements if i < min_num: min_num = i print(min_num) #printing final result output: 10 (smallest number in given list) Q6. Write the Python program to count the number of strings where the string length is 2 or more and the first and last character are same from a given list of strings? Sample List : [‘abc’, ‘xyz’, ‘aba’, ‘1221’] Expected Result : 2 Ans: sampleList=[‘abc’,’xyz’,’aba’,’1221′] count=0 for word in sampleList : if len(word)>=2 and word[0]==word[-1]: count+=1 print(“Number of strings with same first and last character are”,count ) Output Number of strings with same first and last character are 2

(iii) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of digital certificates, passports, and other forms of identification to control access to travel, work, education, health care, and other services;  (iv) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor people’s behavior;  (v) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of nanotechnology in vaccines;  (vi) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of gene-editing technology in vaccines;  (vii) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of biometric data collection in vaccines;  (viii) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the use of facial recognition technology in vaccines;  (ix) The public statements made by Bill Gates and others for the implementation of a global health surveillance system using digital technologies.

(j) The Gates Foundation’s, and its partners’, involvement in the development of a “Digital Health Passport” for global travel, which would include a vaccine-chip implant; (k) The Gates Foundation’s, and its partners’, involvement in the development of a “Digital Health Passport” for global travel, which would include a vaccine-chip implant; (l) The Gates Foundation’s funding of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” initiative, which includes plans to implement a digital currency system and universal basic income; (m) The Gates Foundation’s funding of the World Health Organization’s “Global Preparedness Monitoring Board”, which has been tasked with developing plans to respond to pandemics; (n) The Gates Foundation’s funding of GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, which is responsible for providing vaccines to developing countries; (o) Bill Gates’ involvement in the development of a vaccine-chip implant that could be used to track individuals’ health status and monitor compliance with vaccination requirements.

The Sage Report is a document produced by the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). It was released in late May 2020 and contains advice from experts on how to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. The International Lobby is an initiative led by Bill Gates and other prominent figures to raise funds for global health initiatives related to the pandemic. The Suppressed German Government Report is a 93-page document that was leaked in May 2020. It concluded that the measures taken to combat the pandemic were unjustified, and that there was no scientific basis for them.

The results of this analysis show that crisis management is an important tool for dealing with extraordinary threats and restoring normalcy. It is essential for organizations to have a plan in place to identify, assess, and respond to potential crises. Crisis management teams should be trained to recognize signs of a potential crisis and take the necessary steps to mitigate the impact of the situation. Additionally, organizations should have protocols in place for communicating with stakeholders during a crisis and for evaluating the effectiveness of their response.

  1. 1. In the past the crisis management did not (unfortunately against better institutional knowledge) build up adequate instruments for danger analysis. The situational reports, in which all information relevant for decision-making should be summarized in the continuing/current crisis, today still only cover a small excerpt of the looming spectrum of danger. An assessment of danger is in principle not possible on the basis of incomplete and inappropriate information. Without a correctly carried out assessment of danger, no appropriate and effective planning of measures is possible. The deficient methodology has an effect on a higher plane with each transformation; politics so far has had a strongly reduced chance to make factually correct decisions. 
  2. 2. The observable effects of COVID-19 do not provide sufficient evidence that there is -in relation to the health consequences of all of society -any more than a false alarm. At no point in time, it is suspected, was there a danger as a result of this new virus for the population ( comparison is the usual death rate in Germany). Those who die of corona are essentially those who statistically die this year, because they have arrived at the end of their lives and their weakened bodies cannot any longer fight coincidental everyday challenges (including the approximately 150 circulating viruses). The danger of COVID-19 was overestimated. (In a quarter of a year worldwide no more than 250,000 deaths with COVID-19, as opposed to 1.5 million deaths during the 2017 /18 influenza season). The danger is obviously no larger than that of many other viruses. We arc dealing with a global fal e ala1ám which has been unrecognized over a longer period of time. -This analysis was reviewed by KM4 for scientific plausibility and does not fundamentally oppose the data and risk assessments provided by the RKI [Robert Koch Institute]. 
  3. 3. A fundamental reason for not discovering the suspected false alarm is that the existing policies for the actions of the crisis management group and the crisis management during a pandemic do not contain appropriate instruments for detection which would automatically triger an alarm and the immediate cancellation/abandonment of measures, as soon as either a pandemic proves to be a false alarm or it is foreseeable that the collateral damage -and among these especially the parts that destroy human lives -threatens to become larger than the health effects of and especially the deadly potential of the illness under consideration. 
  4. 4. In the meantime, the collateral damage is higher than the recognizable benefit. The basis of this assessment is not a comparison of material damages with damage to persons (human lives). Alone a comparison of deaths o far due to the virus with deatl1s due to the measures decreed by the state (both without certain data). Attached below is an overview.type summary of collateral health damages (incl. Deaths), reviewed by scientists as to plausibility. 
  5. 5. The ( completely useless) collateral damage of the corona crisis is, in the meantime, gigantic. A large part of this damage will only manifest in the nearer and more distant future. This cannot be avoided anymore, only minimized. 
  6. 6. Critical infrastructures are the lifelines necessary for the survival of modern societies. As a result of the protective measures, the current security of supply is no longer a given as it usually is (so far gradual reduction of the basic security of supply, which could result in a fallout in future challenging situations). The resilience of the highly complex and strongly interdependent complete system of critical infrastructure has been reduced. Our society lives, from now on, with increased vulnerability and a higher risk of failure of infrastructures necessary for life. This can have fatal consequences, if on the in the meantime reduced level of resilience of KRITIS a truly dangerous pandemic or other danger should occur. 
    Four weeks ago, UN-general Secretary Antonio Guterres of a fundamental risk. Guterres said ( according to a report in the Tagesschau on April 4, 2020i): “The weaknesses and insufficient preparation which are becoming apparent through this pandemic give insight into how a bioterrorist attack could look -and these weaknesses possibly increase a risk thereof.” According to our analysis, in Germany a grave deficiency is the lack of an adequate system for the analysis and assessment of danger. 
  7. 7. the protective measures decreed by the state, as well as the manifold societal activities and initiatives which, as initial protective measures cause the collateral damage, but have in the meantime lost any purpose, are largely still in effect. It is urgently recommended to abolish these immediately, to avert damage to the population -especially unnecessary additional deaths -, and to stabilize the situation around critical infrastructure, which is possibly becoming precarious. 
  8. 8. The deficits and failures in crisis management consequently lead to communication of information that was not well.founded. (A reproach could be: The state showed itself to be one of the biggest fake-news-producers in the corona crisis). 

1. Develop a customer-centric approach to marketing and sales, focusing on understanding the needs of customers and providing tailored solutions.

2. Utilize data-driven insights to inform decisions about product development, pricing, and promotions.

3. Invest in customer service initiatives that prioritize customer satisfaction and loyalty.

4. Leverage technology to streamline processes and improve efficiency.

5. Focus on building relationships with customers by providing personalized experiences and engaging content.

6. Create an omnichannel strategy that allows customers to interact with your brand across multiple platforms and devices.

  1. a) The proportionality of interference with the rights of cg. Citizens is currently not given, since the state did not carry out an appropriate consideration with the consequences. The German constitutional court demands an appropriate balancing of measures with negative consequences. (PSPP judgement of May 5, 2020). 
  2. b) The situational reports of the crisis management group BMI-BMG and the communications from the state to the provinces regarding the situation must there fore henceforth -conduct an appropriate analysis and assessment of dangerous -contain an additional section with meaningful, sound data regarding collateral damage (see remarks in the long version) -be freed of irrelevant data and information which are not required for the assessment of danger, because they make it difficult to see what is going on -an index should be formed and added at the beginning 
  3. c) An appropriate analysis and assessment of danger is to be performed immediately. Otherwise the state could be liable for damages that have arisen.174 

The plaintiffs’ statement is supported by the study conducted by Stefan Homburg and Christof Kuhbandner at the Leibniz University Hannover, Germany. The authors concluded that the lock-down measures as modelled and executed were not effective when comparing countries following the WHO protocols and countries that did not. This conclusion was based on data collected post-June 81′ 2020.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is an international organization that engages the foremost political, business, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas. It was founded in 1971 as a not-for-profit foundation and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. The WEF’s mission is to improve the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas. Through its activities and initiatives, the WEF works to create a shared future in which all people can live in dignity and prosperity.

  1. (a) Consistently promotes a “New Economic World .rder” ,which is a vision in the process of being rolled out under the auspices of the World Economic Forum, of which one of the main sponsors is The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. 
  2. (b) The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost politica], business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. 
  3. (c) The World Economic Forum is committed “to the launch of the Great Reset -a project to bring the world’s best minds together to seek a better, fairer, greener, healthier planet as we rebuild from the pandemic.” “The COVID-1i9 crisis has shown us that our old systems are not fit any more for the 21ist century,” said World Economic Forum Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab. “In short, we need a great reset.” 176 
  4. (d) Since its launch on March 11i1 2020i, the Forum’s COVID Action Platform has brought together 1,667 stakeholders from 1,10i6 businesses and organizations to mitigate the risk and impact of the unprecedented global health emergency that is COVID-1i9. The platform is created with the support of the World Health 0 rgamza 10n. , t’ 177  The WEF sponsors have big plans:” … the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.” “The World Economic Forum is launching a new Davos Manifesto, which states that companies should pay their fair share not taxes, show zero tolerance for corruption, uphold human rights throughout their global supply chains, and advocate for a competitive, level playing field.” Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum.i178 (f) In 201i7 Germany, India, Japan, Norway, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Welcome Trust and the World Economic Forum founded the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) to facilitate focused support for vaccine development to combat major health epidemic/pandemic threats. As an organization, the Forum has a track record of supporting efforts to contain epidemics. In 2017, at the Annual Meeting, the C’oaliticrn for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) was launchedi.bringing together experts from government, business, health, academia and civil society to accelerate the development of vaccines. CEPI is currently supporting the race to develop a . . . 179 vaccme agamst t h’ 1s stran d o f t h e coronavuus. (g) Event 20i1, the pandemic exercise in October 20i19i, was co.sponsored by the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation. 180 

This announcement was made in the context of the WEiF’s Great Reset agenda, which is a global initiative to reset the world economy and society in order to create a more equitable and sustainable future. The Great Reset is an ambitious plan that seeks to address global challenges such as climate change, inequality, and poverty. It involves a shift away from traditional economic models towards more sustainable ones, as well as increased collaboration between governments, businesses, and civil society. The goal is to create a new social contract that will ensure everyone has access to basic services and opportunities for economic growth. Trudeau’s announcement of post-COVID-19 infrastructure spending is part of this larger effort to reset the world economy and society.

The Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered damages as a result of the Defendant’s actions. They claim that the Defendant breached their contract, failed to provide adequate services, and caused them financial losses.

  1. (a) This agenda, conspiracy, is spear-headed by Bill Gates, and other Billionaire, Corporate, and Organizational Oligarchs, include vaccine, Pharmaceutical, and Techn0logy Oligarchs, through the WHO, GA VI, and the WEiF, whom they fund and effectively direct and control; 
  2. (b) National and Regional Leaders who are simply, knowingly and/ or unknowingly, as duped c-conspirators, partaking in this conspiracy by simply declaring a “pandemic”, “emergency”, and delegating decisions to their Chief medical officers who are simply following the dictates and guidelines without question nor concern for the world expert opinions against such measures, of the WHO; 
  3. ( c) In effect there are less than a hand-full of people dictating the virtual fate of the planet whereby sovereign Parliaments, Courts, and Constitutions are by-passed; (d) The “social media”, such as Google, Facebook, YouTube, Amazon owned and operated by the likes of Bill Gates, Mark Zukerberg, and, in Canada, the CBC,funded and controlled by the Federal Government, are knowingly playing in concert with this over-arching conspuacy, and in fact over.lapping conspiracies. 

209. (a) infringe upon the Plaintiffs’ rights, freedoms and privileges as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

210. (b) breach their fiduciary duty to the Plaintiffs;

211. (c) breach their statutory duties to the Plaintiffs;

212. (d) breach their common law duties to the Plaintiffs;

213. (e) breach their contractual obligations to the Plaintiffs; and/or,

214. (f) otherwise act in a manner that is oppressive, high-handed, arbitrary or capricious towards the Plaintiffs.

  1. (a) engage in an agreement for the use of lawful and unlawful means, and conduct, the predominant purpose of which is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs, through the declaration of a false pandemic and implementation of coercive and damaging measures including the infliction of a violation of their constitutional rights as set out above in the within statement of claim; and/or 
  2. (b) to engage, in an agreement, to use unlawful means and conduct, whose predominant purpose and conduct directed at the Plaintiffs, is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs, through the declaration of a false pandemic and implementation of coercive and damaging measures including the infliction of a violation of their constitutional rights as set out above in the within statement of claim, that Defendants and officials and employees, should know, in the circumstances, that injury to the Plaintiffs , is likely to, and does result. 

a. Trudeau has been a vocal supporter of the Gates Foundation’s work, including its efforts to develop and distribute vaccines around the world.

b. Trudeau has attended events hosted by the Gates Foundation, including an event in 2017 where he spoke about the importance of global health initiatives.

c. Trudeau has met with Bill Gates on multiple occasions, including at least twice in 2019, once in Toronto and once in Vancouver.

d. The Canadian government has provided funding to the Gates Foundation for various projects, including vaccine development and distribution initiatives.

e. Canada is a member of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which is funded by the Gates Foundation and other donors to provide vaccines to children in developing countries.

f. Canada is also a partner of CEPI (the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), which is funded by the Gates Foundation and other donors to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

  1. (a) PM Trudeau has echoed Bill Gates’ sentiments that mass mandatory vaccination of people is necessary for any sense of normalcy to return. 
  2. (b) Gates uses proxies to successfully lobby the Canadian Government. 
  3. (c) The Gates Foundation founded GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance in 19i99 with $750 million and continues to run it and fund it. The Global Vaccine Alliance, is an organization devoted to pushing vaccinations on the public all across the world. 
  4. (d) GAVI hired a lobbying firm called Crestview Strategy, a public affairs agency. Their Mission Statement is: “We make, change, & mobilize opinion.i” 
  5. (e) Canada has gifted Bill Gates, and his related Foundation and companies well over $1 Billion dollars in pursuit of his agenda, $800 Million recently by Justin Trudeau; 
  6. (f) Crestview has lobbied the Canadian Government on at least 19 occasions since2018 on various “health” matters, all on behalf of GA VI. 

¥ Bill Gates-Vaccines, Pharmaceuticals & Technology 

  1. 212. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, as set out in the within Statement of Claim, that Bill Gate’s companies, and associates, manifest a clear agenda, for himself and his associates in the vaccine, pharmaceutical and technology, industries, through the de facto control of the WHO, influencing and dictating its agenda, to:
    1. (a) Effect a mandatory, global, vaccine policy and laws, which would net an approximately $1i.3 Trillion per year, in which vaccine industry he is major proponent and investor; 
    2. (b) To effect surveillance, through his vaccination agenda, as outlined in their public statement, and the MIT developed smart-phone application to embed nannocrystal beneath the skin which can be read by a smart-phone through smart-phones, and 5-G capacity, in which industries Gates 1s a major stake-holder and investor; 
    3. (c) Using the above to “virtualize” and globalize the World economyi, in which virtual and global New World (Eiconomic) Order in which Gates further sits in the centre, along with the other Billionaire and corporate oligarchs; 
    4. (d) All of which is being effected and accelerated through the false pronouncement of a COVID-1i9 ‘pandemic”, and implementation of baseless and false, draconian measures. 
  2. 213. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that Bill Gates’ statements, and conduct, in the above-noted facts, has been documented, as reflected in the within Statement of Claim, namely at paragraphs 63i, 68, 69, 72, 75, 78, 81i, 85, 93i, 100, 107, 112, 118, 121, 124,199,200,201i,202,203i,205, of the within Statement of Claim, with respect to his agenda and conspiracy with others, including the Defandants. 

¥ The WHOi/ Gates/ Trudeau and Dr. Teresa Tam 

  1. 214. The Plaintiffs state and fact is, that the connection and common agreement between Gates-Trudeau-Tam, in addition to their statements and actions m furthermore of that agreement as outlined above m the within Statement of Claim, is further manifested by the following:
    1. (a) On April 9, 2020 just before Easter, Trudeau announced that: 
      “We will not be coming back to ourfrJrmer normal situation; we can ‘f do that until H’e have developed a vaccine and that could take 12 to 18 months ….. [and] …. This will be the nev1, normal until a vaccine is developed. “183
    2. (b) Trudeau’s statement is a script lifted straight from Bill Gatesá cchoi11g almost word for word. the message Gates has been pushing smcc the coronavuus in North America earlier this winter. The April 9th Highwire video clip at 2:07 captures Gates stating: 
      “Things woná t go back to truly normal un Li I ,Ne have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out basically to the entire world.”184
    3. ( c) Instead of following the recommendations of leading scientists. doctors and epidemiologists, Trudeau is foisting the Gates/WlTO/ Gi VI/ ‘l T globalist agenda which he knows or ought to know, will result in l’inanci,1I ruin for millions of Canadians including the Plaintiffs.
    4. (d) Despite the prevailing global consensus on natural herd imrnunily. Bill Gates 1s determined however, to prevent natural immunity so he can mandate his new vaccine(s) for everyone. Noted scientist and journalist. Rosemary Frei, shows Bill Gates does not áwant people lo acqull’c immunity to COVID-19. Rather, Bill Gates prefers that Ye sulTer the ‘economic pain’ ofelockdown in order to prevent us from acquiring naturnl immunity as Gates has stated: 
      ”We doná t want to have a lot of recovered people I … I ro be clear, we’re tryinge-through the shut-dovvn in the United States -to not get to one percent oC the populatio11 infected. We’re well below that today, but with exponentiation, you could get past that three rndlion [people or approximately one percent of the U.S. population being infected with COVID-19 and the vast rnajorit r covering]. I believe wee,. ill be able to avoid that with having this economic pain.”185 (e) In her latest compelling article, Covid-19 Meltdown and Pharmas’ Big Money Win, Barbara Loe Fisher delves into the many disturbing angles ol this epic viral/political war unleashed on humanity. the havoc caused b the Gates & Fauci lockdown policy and the economic spinoJTs spawnccl by the pandemic. 186 185 Did Bill Gates Just Reveal the Reason for the Lockdowns: By Rosemary Frei, Off-Guardian, April 4, 2020… =8a3 I c96b7b83 lb06c663 ld2d800e39e274fdb4c5-l 593827339-0AbbQnElw4gYMqoe 14KtV.9sVWpJ8_1O6ZguVbep6dVylwrKGMbqfHkxidxl_3uCK08Nlmuk8B5fJzKB4cL3viTl qQYvV8722SeZLNTHOWUovzpclftZQcDi Ix vg3QQ6jPmp ZkNGtNlwGs874a0MhuR Y9 _t7yNj8TyeXmeBXidqKFHOtCmuLJEmS9ZGcLDsNGb5 WKidfn HO7DSzlQ 11 0eNBgH MLXerbj Pr Ks ESdGlhwd3 Ljo Y6FiHbJ u4UI bTEJMbsKQFlq5XIIOtoLGY2e7ffhzjnbUBrcjpv76AL5aOYmAQAI ICC3ttqOt_ k2 I mLMgHN Fa tl2g WSlla4a2S UAI8IzoKXLcbkuTr0!pvKrbjkF8B4ij3p8MdQOK0DZHcW 186Covid-l 9 Meltdown and Pharma’s Big Money Win: (f) Covid-19 has sparked the hottest new market in town -vc1cc111c development. A staggering number of coronavirus vaccrncs me utidcr development right novv with astronomical piles of money being thrnwn at it. Gates is in the thick of it along with Tony Fauci. director ol’ lhc National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Both me on record stating they don’t want people developing natural immunity, 111 stating: 

¥¥hich she says will be used to control the population. McGovern writes: “The Gates Foundation is funding a new generation of digital ID technologies that will be used to track and control the world’s population. The foundation has invested tens of millions of dollars in companies developing so-called ‘vaccine passports’ and other tracking technologies that could be used to enforce compliance with government mandates, such as vaccination requirements or travel restrictions.” 190

Kennedy Jr. explains that the Cates/WHO agenda involves conducting vaccine experiments in the developing world without proper informed consent or adequate safety protocols. He argues that these experiments are often conducted with little regard for the health and well-being of those involved, and can even lead to death or serious injury. Kennedy Jr. also highlights how these experiments are often conducted without any accountability or oversight, leaving vulnerable populations exposed to potentially dangerous treatments.

“Theresa Tam is the perfect example of a globalist puppet. She has been groomed for her role in the globalist agenda, and she is now in a position to make sure that agenda is carried out. She is the perfect person to ensure that the Gates/WHO/Big Pharma agenda is implemented without any resistance from the public.” (f) The Plaintiffs state, and it is a fact, that Trudeau and Tam are working together to implement Gates’ globalist agenda of mandatory vaccination with his new Covid-19 vaccine when it arrives in 18 months.

for the Duchess of Cambridge to take on the anti-vaccine movement. She has already taken steps to ensure that people are not allowed to publicly say anything against vaccinations and is working with governments and social media companies to remove vaccine misinformation and promote scientific literacy. Her goal is to make sure that vaccinations are seen as just a normal part of life, no questions asked.

(j) The Civilian Intelligence Network’s scathing review of Theresa Tam’s  performance says: “Dr. Theresa Tam has been the face of the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Her tenure has been marked by a lack of transparency, an inability to provide crucial epidemiological data, and a refusal to listen to dissenting voices.”


  1. 216. The Plaintiffs state, and the facts is, that the impact of containment measures to Plaintiffs is, inter alia that:
    1. (a) Mass containment measures negatively impacts the development of herd immunity, artificially prolongs the epidemic, extends the period of confinement, and contributes to maintaining a high proportion of susceptible individuals in the population.
    2. (b) California emergency room physicians stated that “sheltering in place does more harm than good and lowers our immune system.” 198
    3. (c) The measures employed to achieve the objective of “flattening the curvei” so as not to overwhelm the health care system were disproportionate to the objective. Our health care system has consistently operated at 40 -50% below capacity since the introduction of these measures.
    4. (d) The suspensions of rights to participate in community and in commerce has caused substantial and irreparable harm to the economy, livelihoods, communities, families, and the physical and psychological well-being of Canadians and the Plaintiffs. These include: 198 hltps:l/
      1. (i) A dramatic increase in reports of domestic violence (30i%). 
      2. (ii) Over six million Canadians have applied for unemployment benefits and 7.8 million Canadians required emergency income support from the Federal government (as of May 2020i). 199 
      3. (iii) The deepest and most rapid loss of jobs, savings and income in the history of Canada. 200
      4. (iv) Numerous citizens have been forced into unemployment and poverty, the loss of their business, and bankruptcy. 
      5. (v) Estimates of the Federal deficit resulting from their response to SARS-CoV-2 ranges up to $400 billion (May 2020). 201 
      6. (vi) Leading Economic Indicators show the Canadian economy is now in ”free/all”. 202 
      7. (vii) Illnesses and conditions not related to SARS-Co V-2 have gone untreated and undiagnosed.
      8. (viii) Dramatic increase in number of individuals dying at home due to lack of medical care and for fear of visiting emergency wards despite the fact that most hospitals have capacity.
      9. (ix) Denial of access to health care professionals including doctors, dentists, chiropractors, physiotherapists, naturopaths, homeopaths, physiotherapists, massage therapists, optometrist, and osteopaths. 199… 200… 201… 202…
      10. (x)  Denial of access to health care services including cancer  treatments, elective surgeries, testing, diagnosing, and treatment.
      11. (xi)  Regulated health care practitioners, including chiropractors,  Naturopaths, and Homeopaths have been directed to refrain from  providing health care knowledge to individuals concerned about  SARS-Co V-2i. This is an unwarranted infringement on the right to therapeutic choice.
      12. (xii)  Dramatic Increase in mental health challenges including suicide.
      13. (xiii)  The significant potential for the traumatizing children due to the  disproportionate fear of contracting a virus for which the risk of  death is virtually zero.
      14. (xiv)  Significant increase in alcohol consumption and drug use.
      15. (xv)  Denial of access to healthy recreation including parks, beaches,  camping, cottages, and activities as golf, tennis, swimming, etc.
      16. (xvi)  Denial of a public education for children.
      17. (xvii)  Denial of access to consumer goods and services.
      18. (xviii)  Individuals dying alone in hospital and extended care facilities  without the support of family and friends. 203
      19. (xix)  Fathers denied access to be present for the birth of their child.
      20. (xx)  Elderly parents in supportive care are denied access to the support  of their family and friends.  203
      21. (xxi) The effective closure of Courts of Law is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians to hold our governments accountable.
      22. (xxii) The effective closure of Parliaments is unprecedented, illegal, unconstitutional, undemocratic, unnecessary, and impedes the ability of Canadians, including the Plaintiffs, to hold governments accountable. 
  2. 217. The Plaintiffs further state, and fact is, that:
    1. (a) To combat COVID-19, “Canada’s federal government has committed to measures totaling around $400 billion, of which about two-fifths constitutes direct spending.” Currently, the deficit for 2019-2020 is expected to be well over $180-$200 Billion. This is seven times larger than the previous year’s deficit. It is expected the interest alone, even at the very low current interest rates will cost $1 B each year. 204 
    2. (b) There is no evidence that the impact of these negative consequences were calculated, much less fully considered in the government’s response to SARS-Co V-2i. 
    3. (c) John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms in Canada has stated there is reason to conclude that the government’s response to the virus is deadlier than the disease itself. 205 204 entry/ ca nada-budget-deficit-covid 19 ca Se85f6bcc5 b60bbd735085f4 205 htlps://w’!:f:t! ( 
    4. d) The cost of combatting SARS-Co V-2 is placed disproportionately on the young and blue collar and service workers who cannot work from home, as opposed to white collar workers who often can. 
    5. (e) The results from Sweden, and other countries that did not engage in mass and indiscriminate lockdowns, demonstrates that other more limited measures were equally effective in preventing the overwhelming of the health care system, and much more effective in avoiding severe economic and individual health consequences. 
    6. (f) The Ontario government took the “extraordinary step” to release a database to police with a list of everyone who has tested.positive for COVID-1i9 in the province. 206 
  3. 218. Furthermore, while upon the declaration of the pandemic, based on a totally erroneous modeling, postulated that, as opposed to regular 650i, 000 deaths every year form seasonal viral respiratory illness , world-wide, that 3 .5 Million may or would die, the erroneous COVID implemented measures have proven to be more devastating than the “pandemic” at its posited worse in that:
    1. (a) In Canada, as elsewhere, 170,000i+ medical, surgical, operations are canceled, with the numbers climbing, as well as closure of other medical services at hospital, which have caused deaths; 
    2. (b) With the fear of lock-downs and self-isolation, patients have not accessed their doctor for diagnosis of medical problems; 
    3. (c) Documented spikes of domestic violence and suicides have been recorded; 
    4. (d) Inordinate spike in alcoholism, drug use, and clinical depression; 

      206 hltps:1/toronto.ctvnews.calmobile/ontario-takes–extraordlnary-step-to-give-police-list-of-all-covid-9-patlents.1.4910950?fbclld=lwAR1 Ojfu 5OYq5BPZJKMyyqiN2P47dK wbZzFMqC8WEpFxilhEF!81cGnfru; (e) Moreover, and most-shocking, the UN through an official of the World Food Bank, on April 22ind,2i020, had published a document stating that, because of COVID-19 (measures )and the disruption of supply chain, it estimates that 130 Million “additional people” “on the planet could be on the brink of starvation by end of year 2020 which, begs the question: why is it justifiable to add 130 Million deaths to purportedly save 3.5 Million? 

  4. 219. The Plaintiffs state, and the facts is, that the purported, and false, goals of the WHO measures and its purveyors, such as the Defendants, are a perpetual moving target, and purposely shift to an unattainable goals, in that:
    1. (a) The initial rationale for the mass lockdown of Canadian society was to “flatten the curve” to avoid overwhelming health care services. It was never about preventing the coronavirus from spreading altogether, but rather to render its spread manageable.
    2. (b) It appears now that the goal has changed. Government appears to have shifted the goal to preventing the virus from infecting any and all Canadians. If so, this ought to be made clear, as should the justification for the change. 207
    3. (c) Y oram Lass, the former director-general of Israel’s Ministry of Health is of the opinion that “lockdown cannot change the final number of infected people. It can only change the rate of infection.” 208 ’07… 0/’/’ htt ps :/ /www. spiked-on Ii n e. com/ 2020/05/2 2/ nothing-can-ju st ify-th is-d est ru ct i o n-of-pe op I es-I ives/ #. Xsgq i N 6 DOu Q. face book
    4. (d) There are warnings of an imminent “second wave.” But if the “first wave” has been flattened, planked or buried to the extent that in vast areas of the country very few people have been exposed to the virus at all, then the “second wave” is not really a second wave at all, but a delayed first wave. 
    5. ( e) Minimizing the total spread of the coronavirus until a vaccine is available will be the most expensive goal in the history of human governance. 
    6. (f) There is no scientific evidence to substantiate that the elimination of the virus through self-isolation and physical distancing is achievable or medically indicated. 
    7. (g) According to four Canadian infectious disease experts, Neil Rau, Susan Richardson, Martha Fulford and Dominik Mertz -“The virus is unlikely to disappear from Canada or the world any time sooni” and “It is unlikely ” 209 that zero infections can be achieved/or COVID-19.i
    8. (h) There is no compelling reason to conclude that the general-population lockdown measures (first requested by the Trudeau government on 17 March) had a detectable effect in Canada. The lockdown measures may have been implemented after “peak prevalence” of actual infections, which renders mitigation measures entirely without effect. 
    9. (i) The Government of Canada has been slow to endorse the re-opening of the economy even as hospitals remain well below capacity -the metric that was initially used to justify the restrictions. 



  1. 220. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that the narrative and mantra created and propagated by Bill Gates that “we do not get back to normal until we have a vaccine” has been accelerated by a falsely declared “pandemic” to what has been a persistent push for mandatory vaccination of every human being on the planet, along with “global governance” as propagated by Bill Gates, Henry Kissinger, the Rockefeller Foundation, GAVI, the WEiF, and their likes. 
  2. 221. With respect to (mandatory) vaccines and the COVID-19i, the áDefendants, in addition to pushing the ultimate aim of mandatory vaccines, spear-headed by Bill Gates, and others, have also ignored and refuse to address the issues in the context of COVID-19i, let alone vaccines at large, as reflected in, inter alia, the following:
    1. (a) Intention to Create Vaccine Dependency:Is it ethical to deny children, young people and most of the population who are at low risk of mortality the opportunity to develop natural immunity when we know natural immunity is lifelong in most cases? Are we going to create another condition where we become ‘vaccine dependent’ or will we recognize the value of natural herd immunity? Advocates of the natural herd immunity model are of the opinion that rather than the mass isolation of billions of people, only the most at-risk people and their close associates should be isolated. The forced mass quarantine of an entire, mostly low-risk population is disproportionate and unnecessary. This is the position being utilized by Sweden.210
    2. (b) Will A COVID 19 Vaccine Be Safe?
      1. (i) Dr. Anthony Fauci -is the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the United States. Fauci has stated: “We need at least around a year and a half to make sure any new vaccine is safe and effective. ” ill
      2. (ii) Dr. Paul Offit -Offit warns, “Right now you could probably get everyone in this country to get this (CV) vaccine because they are so scared of this virus. I think we should keep remembering that most people who would be getting this vaccine are very unlikely to be killed by this virus. “
      3. (iii) Dr. Peter Hotez -dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told Reuters, “I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with. ” (. . . . 211 1v ) p a th ogemc p nmmg ; 210 http;Â¥aÂ¥covid-19-vaccine-save-us/ 211 hllps;…“l
    3. (c) Jonathan Kimmelman, a biomedical ethics professor at McGill University in Montreal, 1s watching how both scientific and ethical standards are maintained while the pandemic vaccme trials progress at breakneck speed. “My concern is that, in the fear and in the haste to develop a vaccine, we may be tempted to tolerate less than optimal science,” Kimmelman said. “That to me seems unacceptable. The stakes are just as high right now in a pandemic as they are in non-pandemic settings. “To show how long the process can take, Kimmelman points to the example of the ongoing search for an effective HIV vaccine that began in the 19i90is. Before healthy people worldwide receive a vaccine against SARS-Co V-2, the risk/benefit balance needs to tip in favor of the vaccine’s efficacy in offering protection over the potential risks, he said. The balance still exists even in the face of a virus wreaking an incalculable toll on human health and society.” 212
    4. (d) CBC News March 24i, 20i20 reported by Amina Zafar;213
    5. (e) Moderna’s vaccine uses genetic material from the virus m the form of nucleic acid. That tells the human body how to make proteins that mimic viral proteins and this should provoke an immune response. Denis Leclerc, an infectious diseases researcher at Laval University in Quebec City, said the advantage of nucleic acid vaccines like Moderna’s is that they’re much faster to produce than other types. While relatively safe, nucleic acid vaccines are generally not the preferred strategy, Leclerc said, because they don’t have the same safety record as the traditional approach. 212 hittps://… 213 https://www n e-resea rch-1.5497697
    6. (f) Will a COVID 19 vaccine be effective?Ian Frazer -Immunologist Ian Frazer has downplayed the role of a vaccine in overcoming the coronavirus pandemic, saying it may “not stop the spread of the virus in the community”. That’s if a vaccine can be developed at all. Frazer, a University of Queensland scientist who was recognized as Australian of the Year in 2006 for his contribution to developing HPV vaccines, said a COVID-1i9 vaccine may not be the end-all to the current crisis. 214 
    7. (g) Role of Influenza Vaccination to Current Outbreak -Allan S. Cunningham, Retired pediatrician The possibility that seasonal flu shots are potential contributors to the current outbreak. A randomized placebo-controlled trial in children showed that flu shots increased fivefold the risk of acute respiratory infections caused by a group of non influenza viruses, including coronaviruses.215 
    8. (h) Mandatory Vaccination
    9. (i) Diane Doucet -Message to New Brunswick Committee on Law Amendments”Mandatory vaccination may soon be imposed on the entire population. Eventually, every person will have to decide between attending school, keeping their job, their home and their ability to participate in society and their so-called freedom to choose. People will also be at risk of losing their jobs if they speak out against mandatory vaccinations. 

This is a powerful statement that speaks to the injustice of forcing people to submit to medical treatments against their will. It highlights the arrogance of policy makers who view citizens as too ignorant to make decisions for themselves and their children, and it calls out the oppressive nature of a system that punishes those who do not comply. This statement also serves as a reminder that we must fight for our rights and freedoms, and stand up against any form of tyranny or oppression.

¥ Microchipping  /Immunity  Passports/  Social  Contact  Vaccine  Surveillance & SG  

  1. 222.  The Plaintiffs state that, and fact is, this global vaccination scheme which is being propelled and pushed by the Defendants, is with the concurrent aim of total and absolute surveillance of the Plaintiffs and all citizens.  
  2. 223.  In  addition  to  the  facts, pleaded  with  respect  to Gates’  vaccine-chip,  nannocrystal “app” already developed, in late June, 2020i, cell-phone companies,  at  the  request  of  Justin  Trudeau  that the 30i-Miillion  eligible  Canadians  “voluntarily” load up “contract-tracing apps” now available from the phone-tech  giants. These companies began dumping the apps on to customers without  informed consent.  
  3. 224.  On June 30it1 2020i, Canada announced that it was participating, to be included,  as one of an initial fifteen (15) countries, to require “immunity passport”, a cell. phone application disclosing medical vaccination history.216 Canada is one of an  initial fifteen (15) countries to enter into  a  contract to deploy “immunity  216http ://www. nq-covi-pass-i m mu nity-passports.slated-roll-15-cou ntries/269006/ passport” technology. The technology would utilize a cell-phone application to disclose medical vaccination history. 217 
  4. 225. The Plaintiffs further state, and the fact is, that above and beyond what is set out above in the within Statement of Claim, mandatory vaccination, for any disease, let alone a virus, is a flagrant violation of the Plaintiffs’ Charteri, and written constitutional rights, under s. 2 and 7 of the Charter, to freedom of belief, conscience, religion, and life liberty and security of the person as a violation of physical and psychological integrity, where informed medical consent is absent in a mandatory scheme. 

¥ Vaccines in General 

  1. 226. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is that: 
    1. (a) it is undisputed that vaccines cause severe, permanent injury up to and including death in a certain percentage of those who are vaccinated, including physical, neurological, speech, and other disabilities; 
    2. (b) that, as a result of this reality, risk, and severe injury, certain North American jurisdictions, such as the USA, and Quebec, as well as all G.7 countries except Canada, have established compensation schemes for those injured and killed by vaccines;
    3. (c) that Ontario has no such compensation scheme; 
    4. (d) that there is no individual pre-screening, to attempt to pre-determine, which individual may have a propensity to be so injured, even in cases where older siblings, in the same family have been injured, no 
    5. ( e) the Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that while peanuts and other nuts, as an absolute proposition, do not injure or kill, they do injure or kill those who are allergic to them. While schools have taken saturated and heightened steps to make their spaces “nut-free”, the risks of vaccines to children, particularly those who are pre.disposed to injury and death from them, are completely ignored. 

      investigation is undertaken or weighed with respect to the risks of their younger siblings being vaccinated;

  2. 227. The individual, biological Plaintiffs state that they further rely on the facts set out below under the Plaintiff heading “Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC)”. 
  3. 228. The individual, biological Plaintiffs state that the compulsory vaccinationi, and or testing, schemes violates their rights, by act and omission. Mandatory vaccination removes the right to weigh the “risks” of vaccinating or not vaccinating, to allow for informed choice, in that vaccines can cause injury or death, is a violation of their rights as follows: 
    1. (a) an in limine compulsory vaccination scheme violates s.2(a) and (b) of the  Charter in infringing the rights to freedom of conscience, religion, thought and  belief, as well as infringing the rights to liberty and security of the person, in interfering with the physical and psychological integrity of the person and the  right to make choices as to that integrity and autonomy, pursuant to s.7 of the  Charter;
    2. (c) that the failure and omissions of the Defendants, their officials and delegees, in the vaccination scheme, to transparently and honestly present the risks of vaccination, pro and con, and the failure and omissions to make individual assessments to pre-determine and pre-screen those children who may have a propensity and pre-disposed to being vaccine injured, constitutes a violation of the same Charter cited above, in depriving the right to an informed consent before medical treatment through vaccine is compulsorily administered, by way of omission as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in, inter alia, Vriend in unnecessarily exposing children and adults, to injury up to and including death, by an overly-broad, untailored, indiscriminate and blind vaccination scheme, notwithstanding the dire and pointed warnings in the manufacturers’ own very inserts and warnings as to the risks. 
  4. 229. The Plaintiffs state that the violations of their ss. 2(a) and (b) Charter rights are not justified under s.1 of the Charter and puts the Defendants to their onus of justifying the violations. The Plaintiffs further state that the violations of their s. 7 Charter rights, as set out above in the statement of claim, are not in accordance with the tenets of fundamental justice in that the scheme and provisions suffer from overbreadth and that the protection of overbreadth in legislation has been recognized, by the Supreme Court of Canada, as a tenet of fundamental justice, and that further they cannot be saved under s.1 of the Charter, the onus of which lies with Defendants. 

Â¥ Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC)

  1. 230. Vaccine Choice Canada is a federally registered not-for-profit educational society. VCC is committed to protecting children’s health by informing parents of the existing and emerging scientific literature evaluating the risks, side effects, and potential long-term health effects of artificial immunization. VCC works to protect the right of all people to make fully informed and voluntary vaccine decisions for themselves and their children. Vaccine Choice Canada was originally incorporated as the Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (VRAN) in 1982i. It changed its name to Vaccine Choice Canada(VCC) in 20i14i. 
  2. 231. In the 3 8 years that Vaccine Choice Canada, and its predecessor organization, has been involved in reviewing the vaccine safety literature, supporting families in their vaccine decisions, and developing educational materials related to vaccine safety, efficacy and necessity, so that individuals can make responsible and informed decisions, VCC has noted, uncovered, and researched certain established facts as set out below. 
  3. 232. VCC states that, with respect to facts pertinent to product safety testing, the facts and medical literature sets out that: 
    1. (a) Vaccines do not undergo the same level of safety testing as is required for all other drugs and medical products. 
    2. (b) None of the vaccines licensed for use in Canada have been tested for safety using long-term, double blind, placebo-controlled studies. 
    3. (c) Vaccine products licensed for use in Canada are not evaluated for safety using a neutral placebo, 218 a requirement for all other pharmaceutical products. 
    4. (d) Vaccines are an invasive medical intervention whose safety is determined primarily by the amount of injury or death reported after vaccination. 
    5. (e) Pre-licensing safety monitoring of childhood vaccines, prior to the vaccines being administered, is not long enough to reveal whether vaccmes cause autoimmune, neurological or developmental disorders. 219 
    6. (f) Studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the vaccination schedule have not been conducted. 220 
    7. (g) There are too few scientifically sound studies published in the medical literature to determine how many serious brain and immune system problems ¥ 221 are or are not cause db y vaccmes.
    8. (h) The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both . .. 222 pre-an d k 1 1 d post-mar etmg, 1s arge y ma equate.
    9. (i) Vaccines have not been tested for carcinogenicity, toxicity, genotoxicity, mutagenicity, ability to impair fertility, or for long-term adverse reactions. 
    10. (j) Health Canada does not conduct its own independent clinical trials to determine vaccine safety and efficacy and instead relies on the data provided by the vaccine manufacturers. 
    11. (k) Studies comparing the overall health of vaccinated and unvaccinated children reveal that vaccinated children are significantly more likely to have neuro.developmental disorders and chronic illness. 
    12. (l) There is evidence that vaccines are contaminated with unintended ingredients and that the health impact of injecting these ingredients is unknown. 224 
    13. (m) Canada is the only G7 Nation without a national program to compensate those injured or killed by vaccination, and one(l) of two(2) G-20 Nations without a vaccine injury compensation program. The other nation being Russia. 
    14. (n) The United States Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has awarded more than $4e.1 billion in compensation since 1989. 
    15. (o) The published medical literature recognizes that vaccines can cause permanent injury including death.
    16. (p) The US government has acknowledged that vaccination can cause brain damage resulting in symptoms of autism in genetically susceptible children. 
    17. 225 ( q) The US Centre for Disease Control (CDC )has acknowledged that every domestic case of polio that occurred after 1979 was caused by the vaccine . 226 stram o f po 1á 10. 
    18. (r) Vaccines include ingredients that are classified as poisons, carcinogens, toxins, neurotoxins, immune-and-nervous-system disruptors, allergens, fertility inhibitors, and sterilizing agents. 
    19. (s) Health Canada exposed children to cumulative levels of mercury and aluminum, in the incubation of the vaccines that exceeded the US FDA’s safety guidelines. 

Vaccine injury is a rare occurrence, and the risk of experiencing an adverse reaction to a vaccine is generally very low. Vaccine safety is monitored closely by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other public health organizations. Vaccines are tested extensively before they are approved for use in the general population, and any potential risks associated with their use are carefully evaluated. Vaccine manufacturers must also provide information about possible side effects on their product labels. People who have certain medical conditions or allergies may be at higher risk for experiencing an adverse reaction to a vaccine, so it is important to discuss any concerns with a healthcare provider prior to receiving a vaccine.

  1. (a) Pre-screening to identify individuals who may be at increased susceptibility to vaccine injury and death does not occur in Canada. 
  2. (b) Health Canada has not committed resources to identify those individuals who may have increased susceptibility to experience vaccine injury or death. 
  3. (c) Policies to administer vaccines to “Mature Minors”, often without the knowledge and consent of the parents and without the informed consent of the “Mature Minor”,, in schools and medical settings without the knowledge or consent of the parents has inadequate safety protocols to fully consider the personal and family medical history prior to vaccination. 
  4. ( d) This failure to fully consider personal and family medical history puts these youth at increased risk of vaccine injury. 

Vaccine safety monitoring is an important part of ensuring the safety of vaccines. Vaccine safety monitoring includes tracking and analyzing data on vaccine-related adverse events, such as allergic reactions, fever, or other side effects. Vaccine safety monitoring also involves conducting research to better understand the potential risks associated with vaccination. Vaccine safety monitoring is conducted by public health agencies, healthcare providers, and vaccine manufacturers.

  1. (a) Doctors and health care workers are not trained to recognize and diagnose vaccine lllJury. 
  2. (b) There are no legal consequences when medical professionals fail to report vaccine mJury. 
  3. (c) Parents’ observations of health and behavioral changes following vaccination are routinely ignored and denied by doctors and rarely captured in adverse events reporting systems. 
  4. (d) It is recognized that fewer than 1 % of vaccine adverse reactions are reported. 227 (e) Ontario’s AEiFI reporting system has lower reporting rates than other provinces. 
  5. (f) The medical industry has failed to fully consider the combined toxicology of vaccine ingredients and the synergistic effect of combining vaccine ingredients. 

“The primary purpose of safeguarding policy is to ensure that patients receive the highest quality of care and protection from harm. This includes protecting them from physical, psychological, and financial harm. Safeguarding policies should be tailored to the specific needs of each patient and should include measures to protect their privacy, confidentiality, dignity, autonomy, and rights.”

  1. (a) The primary metric used by Health Canada to measure the success of the vaccine program appears to be how many vaccines are delivered. 
  2. (b) The goal of public health vaccine policy is to persuade parents to comply with the full vaccine schedule. 229 
  3. (c) The pursuit of the goal of persuading parents to comply with vaccination recommendations is incompatible with the goal of allowing parents to possess the knowledge they need to exercise their right to informed consent, and act in their child’s best interests. 
  4. d) The right to informed consent has been recognized as one of the most fundamental ethics in medicine. 
  5. (e) Public health professionals routinely fail to inform citizens of their legal right to personal, religious and medical exemptions where they exist. 
  6. (f) Health Canada, with respect to vaccmes, places public policy over individual health considerations. 
  7. (g) Government policy makers have refused to consider the fact that the risks of the target diseases are not the same for every child and that some children are at greater risk of being harmed by vaccines due to genetic or environmentally caused predispositions. 
  8. (h) Government policymakers ignore that the fact that for informed consent to happen, the risk-benefit analysis must be conducted for each vaccine and individually for each child. 
  9. (i) Antibody titre testing is rarely conducted in an effort to avoid unnecessary vaccination. 
  10. j) An increasing number of parents are choosing not to vaccinate because they recognize that public health vaccine policy poses a serious threat to both their health and liberty. 

“Vaccine injury is a rare occurrence and the vast majority of vaccine recipients experience no adverse effects. Vaccines are rigorously tested for safety and efficacy before they are approved for use in the United States. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 established a system to ensure that individuals who experience an adverse event following vaccination receive compensation for their injuries. This system includes the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which is administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as well as state-level programs that provide additional compensation for vaccine-related injuries.”

  1. (a) Vaccine manufacturers and medical professionals are not held legally and financially accountable when vaccine injury and death occurs. 
  2. (b) A consequence of this legal immunity is that there is no legal or financial incentive for the vaccine industry to make their products safer, even when there is clear evidence that vaccines can be made safer. 
  3. (c) Systemic corruption within the medical establishment is well recognized within Â¥ Â¥ 230a23a1 t h e sc1ent1 ‘fi 1c commumty. 
  4. (d) Conflicts of interest in biomedical. research are “very common”. 232 

-The product or service may not be suitable for their needs.
-The product or service may not be the best option available.
-The product or service may have hidden costs or fees.
-The product or service may have a limited lifespan.
-The company providing the product or service may not be reputable.

  1. (a) vaccines do not confer life-long immunity; 
  2. (b) not all vaccines eliminate susceptibility to infection; 
  3. (c) not all vaccines are designed to prevent the transmission of infection; 
  4. (d) most vaccines do not alter the safety of public spaces; 233 
  5. (e) Health Canada has acknowledged that vaccines are voluntary in Canada and cannot be made mandatory due to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; 
  6. (f) there is no scientific evidence that herd immunity can be achieved using vaccines due to the temporary nature of the immunity offered nor that vaccine herd immunity is more effective that natural herd immunity; 
  7. (g) vaccine can and do cause permanent injury and death; 
  8. (h) there is no scientific evidence that vaccines are primarily responsible for reduced mortality over the last century as is often claimed; 
  9. (i) the human body has an innate capability to fight off infections and heal  itselfi;
  10. (j) the pharmaceutical companies that produce almost all vaccines have been found guilty and paid billions of dollars in criminal penalties for research fraud, faking drug safety studies, failing to report safety problems, bribery,  kickbacks and false advertising 234;
  11. (k) Canadian children are among the most vaccinated children in the world
  12. (l) there is no compensation available in Canada, except for Quebec, should  vaccination result in injury or death;
  13. (m)only two provinces in Canada (Ontario and New Brunswick) reqmre  exemptions to decline vaccination;
  14. (n) recommended/required vaccmes vary by provmce, by state, and by country.  

The product monograph is an important source of information for consumers. It provides detailed information about the vaccine, including its ingredients, how it works, and potential side effects. It also includes warnings about any limitations to safety testing and recognized adverse events that may occur after vaccination. Consumers should always read the product monograph before receiving a vaccine to ensure they are aware of all potential risks associated with the vaccine.

Yes, vaccine mandates violate the medical and legal ethic of informed consent. Informed consent is a fundamental principle in medical ethics that requires a patient to be fully informed about the risks and benefits of any medical treatment before they can give their consent to it. Vaccine mandates require individuals to receive certain vaccines without giving them the opportunity to make an informed decision about whether or not they want to receive them. This violates the right of individuals to make decisions about their own health care, which is protected by the ethical principle of informed consent.

Yes, vaccine mandates do violate the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights, the Nuremberg Code, professional codes of ethics, and all provincial health Acts. Vaccine mandates require individuals to receive certain vaccinations in order to access certain services or benefits. This violates the right to autonomy and informed consent as outlined in the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights. It also violates the Nuremberg Code which states that individuals must give voluntary consent before participating in any medical experiment. Furthermore, it violates professional codes of ethics which state that healthcare professionals should respect patient autonomy and provide informed consent before administering any treatment. Finally, it violates provincial health Acts which protect individuals from being forced to receive medical treatments without their consent.

244. Vaccine manufacturers are not required to provide information on the risks of their products to consumers.

This is not an acceptable practice and should be addressed immediately. Vaccination should always be voluntary, and no one should ever be threatened or intimidated into receiving a vaccine. Schools should ensure that all students are aware of their rights to refuse vaccination and provide them with the necessary information to make an informed decision.

This is not true. Indigenous people are required to receive the same vaccines as non-Indigenous people, based on medical evidence of risk. Vaccines are recommended for all individuals, regardless of their ethnicity or background, in order to protect them from preventable diseases.

The Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA) requires that all students attending school in Ontario must be immunized against certain diseases. The list of required immunizations is set out in the regulations under the ISPA and includes diphtheria, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, meningococcal disease and pertussis. Students may be exempt from immunization for medical or religious reasons.

  1. ( a) Only school children are mandated to provide their medical records under ISP A. Adults are not required and are less likely to be ‘up to date’ with their vaccinations. 
    235 http :/ /kidsboostimmunity .com/sites/default/files/reusable_ files/kbi_ be pdf 
  2. (b) The forced disclosure of private medical records puts a child’s medical privacy at risk.
  3. (c) This disclosure often results in the child being ostracized by school staff and peers. 
  4. (d) The ISP A does not give the medical officer of health authority to suspend a student. Only a principal can suspend a student from school. The Education Act does not have any section that allows a principal to suspend for lack of medical records. Yet this is routinely done for those who do not, or refuse, to comply with the mandatory scheme. 
  5. (e) Parents who do not comply with unlawful suspension are threatened with child protection services. 
  6. (f) Children who are under vaccinated or without exemptions are intimidated, held in the office, and incorrectly told by school officials that they need to get their shots or they cannot come to school. 
  7. (g) The HSARB (Health Service Appeal and Review Board), which deals with appeals of suspensions, registration and expulsions, cannot rule on Charter challenge cases, as the enabling legislation specifically bars jurisdiction to adjudicate Charter issues. 
  8. (h) There is zero accountability for violations of rights by the medical officer of health. This has resulted in many cases of the Medical Officer of Health unlawfully suspending young children for 60 to 90 school days, contrary to the 20 days suspension as set out in the ISP A. 


  1. 249. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant CBC, and other mainstream media, is purposely suppressing valid, sound, and sober criticism of recognized experts with respect to the measures that amount to censorship and violation of freedom of speech, expression and the media. 
  2. 250. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, a completely publicly-funded news service, and national broadcaster, paid for by Canadian taxpayers, has been to the Trudeau government, and acted as, PRAVDA was and acted for the Soviet Union in the cold-war, with respect to coverage of the COVID.”pandemic”, “emergency”, and its draconian measures. 
  3. 251. The Plaintiffs state that CBC, as the nationally and publicly-funded broadcaster under the public broadcasting policy for the Canadian public, under the Broadcast Act, owes: 
    1. (a) a Fiduciary duty to the Plaintiffs and all citizens; and 
    2. (b) a duty in Negligence (negligent investigation) to the Plaintiffs and all citizens; To be independent, fair, balanced, and objective in its coverage of the “pandemic”, declared “emergency”, and the measures undertaken, which duties it has breached causing damages to the Plaintiffs. 

¥ Negligence 

  1. 252. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant, CBC, as a publicly-funded mandate to publicly broadcast on behalf of Canadians, owes a common-law, and statutory duty of care to the Plaintiffs, to fairly, independently, objectively report, and engage in responsible journalism, on the news and current affairs, and the Plaintiffs further state that:
    1. (a) the CBC breached that duty of care; and 
    2. (b) as a result of the breach of that duty of care, the Plaintiffs suffered damages. 
  2. 253. The Plaintiff states and the fact is, this duty was breached by the CBC’s negligent acts and omissions, including inter alia, the following:
    1. (a) The daily broadcasting of Trudeau’s press-conferences, with absolutely no questions about the scientific and medical evidence behind the measures, and their source; 
    2. (b) Whether contrary expert views exist, to the secret advice being followed; 
    3. (c) If opposite, expert opinion exist, what is the government’s response to it?; 
    4. (d) The CBC further dumps, on a daily basis, the government numbers on COVID-positive rates, and death rates, without any investigation or scrutiny as to the basis of compiling those numbers, and who and how the parameters are determined in complying those numbers nor any contextual analysis as to what they mean; 
    5. (e) The CBC has done no independent investigation, nor asked any questions, on the scientific or medical basis of the COVID-measures but simply parrots the government line, and has not investigated, exposed, nor published the avalanche of Canadian and World experts who firmly hold an opposite view, and severe criticism of the measures, nor put those criticism to the Federal Defendants for response. 

The Plaintiffs allege that CBC has breached its duty of care to the Plaintiffs by failing to provide fair, independent, objective, and responsible coverage of their story. They claim that CBC has instead acted in a manner more akin to a propagandistic state news agency serving a dictatorial regime. The Plaintiffs seek damages for the harm caused by CBC’s alleged breach of its duty of care.

(c) That she is a Nobel Prize nominee; and  (d) That her views are not “controversial” but rather, based on her experience and expertise, are valid.

No, the reporters do not give any hint as to who debunked her expert views, when it happened, or on what medical basis.

No, the reporters do not investigate or pose any questions about why it is appropriate to remove from Face book or YouTube the views of a recognized, working World expert of virology with respect to issues of COVID-19. This lack of investigation and questioning by the reporters and CBC is concerning and raises questions about their commitment to providing accurate and unbiased information.

¥ Fiduciary Duty 

  1. 256. The Plaintiffs further state that the CBC further has a fiduciary relationship, and owed a corresponding fiduciary duty, to the Plaintiffs, as the national publicly.funded broadcaster to fairly, independently, objectively report, and engage in responsible journalism, on the news and current affairs for the following reasons: 
  2. 257. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendants breached this fiduciary duty as set out above in this Statement of Claim. 
  3. 258. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, Facebook, YouTube , Google, and other social media are viciously censoring, and removing any and all content that criticizes or takes issue with the WHO, and governments that follow WHO guidelines, with respect to covid-1i9i, as purported “misinformation” contrary to “community standards” even when that content is posted by a recognized expert. 
  4. 259. The Plaintiffs further state, and the fact is, that the Defendant Federal Crown is by way of act and omission, under inter alia, the Broadcast Act , and its Agencies such the CRTC, legislatively and administratively violating the Plaintiffs’ rights under s. 2 of the Charter, to freedom of expression and the press in doing nothing to halt what has been described by members of the scientific community as ” Stalinist censorship”, by government, along with media the likes of CBC, Facebook, and YouTube. In fact, the Federal Crown goes further, in following suit with these social media censors, to propose criminal sanctions for posting such deemed and anointed “misinformation” by all, including experts. 
  5. 260. On or about end of May, 2020 the UK ” Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGEi) -COVID-19 Response, in response to the unwarranted measures of redaction, and removing, all criticism in respect of COVID.Measures, from the Report, of this government advisory body, the body responsible for their SAGE report referred to the government redaction as “Stalinist Censorship”. 
  6. 261. The Plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that CBC, Facebook, and Y ouTube, and other major social media, in their coverage of the COVID-19i, have acted in the same fashion, by knowingly and intentionally suppressing and removing expert opinion not in line with the official dogma of the WHO, which is being blindly and deafly parroted and incanted by the Defendant governments (leaders) and their officials, to the detriment of the Plaintiffs and citizens at large, in violation of their constitutional rights. 


  1. 262. In summary, the Plaintiffs state that the COVID -19 Legislation, and Regulations By-Laws, and orders, violate, as follows, the Plaintiffs’ statutory and constitutional rights in: 
  2. 263. The Plaintiffs rely on: 
  3. 264.  The Plaintiffs therefore request:
  4. 265.  The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried in Toronto.  

The best way to learn a new language is to immerse yourself in it. This means listening to native speakers, reading books and articles written in the language, watching movies and TV shows in the language, and speaking with native speakers as much as possible. Additionally, there are many online resources available that can help you learn a new language, such as apps, websites, and online courses.