Canadian Senators face Pandemic Prevention & Preparedness Bill while COVID NEWS explodes!

But there is NOTHING in Bill C-293 to truly PREVENT ILLNESS and DEATH!! Attention journalists: ***Please see imbedded Questions for Further Investigation + the List of 10 more!

Some of the questions raised in the text below have been turned into a printable handbill to share with others. This is in support of the attempts to quickly reach Canada’s Senators as outlined here: https://www.canadaexitwho.org/bill-c-293

3 Column Did You Know

160KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Gather & Key Points Poster

1.18MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

HOW TO PREVENT A PANDEMIC

(Trying to “fact-check” Bill C-293 using DuckDuckGo)

Looking up “How to Prevent a Pandemic” online, we see the heavily government funded/corporate backed institutions touting familiar sounding recommendations. Here, just a few in the order in which they appeared on my screen:

• At the top of the list: vaccinating people BEFORE a pandemic hits to prevent “vaccine preventable” illnesses. This comes from the World Health Organization, touting its “global strategies for the prevention and control of epidemic-prone diseases, such as yellow fever, cholera and influenza” all known as “vaccine-preventable” diseases. (LINK) These illnesses are currently the subjects of “road maps”, “frameworks” or “global strategies” set to go till 20230. Reference is made to the “Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework”. ***Did you know that when SARS-CoV-2 was first announced, it was decided NOT to follow the outline of the WHO’s PIP Framework? Why not? Q: for intrepid journalists… how many lives would have been saved had that framework been followed?

• Next, America’s National Public Radio carries a dramatic tale of specific researchers who examine the animal origins of viruses. (LINK) Apparently most viruses that impact humans have “spilled over” from all sorts of species living in close contact with humans for millennia. (This was why Europeans had resistance to illnesses that wiped out vast numbers of indigenous people in North America after first contact.) Despite the big focus on pinning down origins, hidden in plain sight in the article is this: “First off, the vast majority of these spillovers don't harm anyone, Salemi says. Most people's immune systems fight off the pathogen without having symptoms at all. When a virus does trigger symptoms, the illness masquerades as a cold, flu or stomach bug. On top of that, the virus rarely spreads to another person, or only to a few people. Outbreaks are small.” The authors could have taken their article in a whole other direction, picking up on ways to strengthen the immune system across the board for pandemic prevention Instead, they go cite the infamous president of Eco Health Alliance, Peter Daszak, as he “estimated that more than 60,000 SARS-like viruses spill over from bats into people each year in Southeast Asia alone.” ***Did you know that Daszak’s work is considered bioweapons research, and that it was moved to Wuhan where it remained funded by Dr. Fauci and the NIH? (LINK) Q: for intrepid journalists… how is it that Dr. Fauci’s institute had patents for components of the genetic structure of BOTH the SARS-CoV-2 virus AND the “vaccines” filed BEFORE 2019? (LINK) How many lives would have been saved had the ban on bioweapons research instituted by Pres. Obama been taken seriously and this institute’s work been shut down? Also: ***Did you know that there is NOTHING in Bill C-293 related to evidence-based means of strengthening immunity in the general population and in particular in the case of people deemed as immunocompromised? Nothing to assist people to effectively fight off disease without the use of pharma products? Q: for journalists - Why not?

• Third in line, (oddly, from 2021) the UK based Wellcome Trust recommends more global coordination: “Global problems need global solutions. 

  While action is needed at local, national and regional levels to improve preparedness, there are a set of activities best coordinated globally….a new Global Health Threats Council or Board should work with existing groups like the World Health Organization, the Global Fund, Gavi, CEPI, and not duplicate their work or activities.” (LINK) Along with this, more funding is needed for “Research and Development (R&D) for diseases that are at risk of becoming the next pandemic…[particularly for] globally networked surveillance and research to prevent and detect emerging or escalating infectious diseases.” And thirdly, the authors recommend fast tracking manufacturing for diagnostic test kits, vaccines and treatments. ***Did you know that there are no details on the potential costs to Canada for the funding of globally networked surveillance, research and manufacturing capabilities in Bill C-293? Are those costs possibly hidden in what is deemed the “national pandemic prevention and preparedness coordinator”? Qs: for intrepid journalists - Will Canada’s contribution to such global funds be running inside or outside of the budget for this bill, should it be enacted into law? AND while you are looking at financial matters, here is another question: Why is it that since Minister Freeland became our Finance Minister, the per capita funding from Canada, to organizations like CEPI has exploded to levels many times those of other countries? Could this have anything to do with Ms. Freeland’s double role as Board of Trustee member of the world’s greatest corporate lobby group, one that prominently features the CEOs of top-grossing vaccine manufacturers like Albert Bourla? Given the guidance for Canadian public officials to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, why is it that Ms. Freeland’s moonlighting in a position alongside funding recipients WHILE having control of funding allocation is not being reported on? Has her party directed journalists to stay away from the topic?

At this point, I re-entered my search to include the year 2024 as I noted too many articles from 2021 showing up - articles whose authors naturally were not able to look at the topic of pandemic preparation with the benefit of hindsight given all the knowledge gained since 2021.

The results are disappointing…only one hit is something actually written in 2024:

• an article summarizing the insights of 5 researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health researchers who are now turning their attention away from COVID-19 to “a new infectious disease outbreak—H5N1 avian flu virus, or bird flu—[which] started making headlines as it spread among dairy cows and poultry in the U.S. and infected a small number of farmworkers”. (LINK) The researchers feel that how COVID-19 was dealt with sets the pattern for future pandemic illnesses: “My sense is that, in the next pandemic, that in the period as we wait for rapid development of a vaccine, we will more quickly deploy the tools at our disposal, including masks, tests, and better ventilation and filtration. We won’t have to wait a year again to convince people that all of this matters.” According to this speaker, all of these measures are non-brainers. He appears unaware of data to the contrary. Despite this shortfall, and failure to mention the OBVIOUS - the huge failures of the mRNA Covid vaccines, this conversation does include a few tidbits for those looking at pandemic prevention in the future -

  • building design to mitigate indoor transmission of airborne viruses (no specifics, but likely air quality monitoring was the intention);

  • the need for LOCAL data sets and models “aimed at helping [decision-makers at the state and local level] monitor lockdown behavior or figure out where to put mobile vaccination units” (i.e. developing strategies LOCALLY not following top down GLOBAL dictates);

  • “funding for soap in public school bathrooms” (doesn’t this happen anyway?);

  • taking politics OUT of pandemic response;

  • finding ways to deal with the “persistent and recalcitrant problem of antimicrobial resistance” (no specifics were mentioned though);

  • AND, the most useful suggestion of all - focus on improving food and nutrition!! A tuberculosis researcher said: “In my field, the most striking answer to that came out of a trial in India, the RATIONS trial, where they clustered randomized communities and provided food and nutritional support. And it had a more protective effect against TB, or at least as protective an effect, than the best vaccine candidate in trials now.” ***Did you know that there is NOTHING in Bill C-293 that references the protective effects against illness of food, nutrition, clean water, sanitation, sleep or any other commonly identified pillars of health? Q: for intrepid journalists? Why not? Also - is there a recognition in C-293 of the need for mitigation strategies to be decided in line with LOCAL conditions? Has anyone in Health Canada et al underscored that need? And will Health Canada do away with nationwide or province wide declarations and mandates moving forward to allow for locally developed solutions to local contexts? If so, why is there no mention of that in Bill C-293?

MORE QUESTIONS

Here are further questions for intrepid journalists — and of course for Senators IF they have time to read all this, given the 65 items on the agenda BEFORE Bill C-293 is supposed to be deliberated upon. (LINK)

APPOINTING A COORDINATOR

Given this: “Minister of Health must appoint a national pandemic prevention and preparedness coordinator from among the officials of the Public Health Agency of Canada to coordinate the activities under the Pandemic Prevention and Preparedness Act.”

1. Which of the officials of PHAC successfully coordinated any previous pandemic? It obviously cannot be anyone who was in charge of dealing with COVID-19. It also obviously cannot be anyone working at PHAC who remained silent while all of these violations were being implemented, leading to the huge rise in all-cause mortality across the country and continuing to this day (LINK)

   1. banning effective early treatment protocols

   2. not stopping colleges from delicensing medical professionals who EFFECTIVELY treated Canadians with COVID-19

   3. mandating known toxic injections known not to stop transmission while knowingly violating time honoured principles undermining the practice of medicine)

   4. knowingly lying to Canadians (as demonstrated here: )

2. Will the future “national pandemic prevention and preparedness coordinator” have an office? Will the office consist of branches? If so, what will the branches deal with? Will each of those branches need to be staffed? By people with which qualifications? Has anyone done a cost estimate? Are there plans to model the branches based on work done in countries who were successful in mititgating harms of the circulating SARS-CoV-2 virus? (It is clear that countries who followed PRE-2019 World Health Organization protocols were MORE SUCCESSFUL than those who, like Canada, fell in line with protocols enacted by the WHO after 2019.)

FOCUS ON WILDLIFE

The “ONE HEALTH” approach (described as “a multisectoral and multidisciplinary collaborative approach that focuses on the human, animal, plant and ecosystem health and welfare interface”) figures prominently in this bill. Given the minimal impact animal “spillover” has on human health, and the far greater risk of virus based bioweapons escaping into the population…

3. why have the Bill’s authors put a far bigger focus on matters around land use, commercial wildlife operations, agricultural matters, etc. than on the improvement of health conditions?

4. What is meant by “commercial activities that disproportionately contribute to pandemic risk, including activities that involve high-risk species”? Which species are “high-risk species” in this country? How is that risk determined?

5. What is included in “commercial wildlife trade in Canada”? Does this refer to hunting? Do we have “commercial” hunters in Canada? Does it refer to fishing? Are fish considered wildlife? Why is this verbiage not better defined in the bill?

NOTE: To gain some background knowledge into these issues, please first take the time to listen to a presentation by Dr. Meryl Nass. She has previously testified twice in Canada on matters related to anthrax in the days of the Gulf War. Since then, she has been closely tracking ties between major US health agencies and bioweapons development. The evidence she presented at a conference in Italy links EVERY MAJOR PANDEMIC OUTBREAK with corresponding gain-of-function research. This means that “spillover viruses” are genetically altered to become more transmissible. Releases of these altered viruses then lie at the base of nearly all major pandemic illnesses. See the first talk by Dr. Meryl Nass listed here: https://cmsindipendente.it/seminario20240419.

4. Why are there ZERO references to containing gain of function research in the text of this bill, knowing this is the single most important cause of pandemic illness? Why also, is nothing stated about known bioweapons laboratories in Canada and its allied countries, including Ukraine? At the very least, a bill on preventing pandemics should include a reference to “containing lab leaks.”

4. A growing number of Canadians are becoming aware of the US based Wildlands Project, first proposed in 1991. “The Wildlands Project aimed to return 50 percent of the continental United States to a “natural” state….Rooted in a school of thought known as Deep Ecology, which rejects the idea that some living things have greater value than others, the Wildlands Project called for establishing a system of core wilderness areas where human activity would be prohibited. Biological “corridors” would link the “core areas,” serving as highways allowing nonhumans to pass from one to another. “Our goal is to create new political realities based on the needs of other species,” Foreman told Science News in 1993….What began three decades ago as musings on the outermost fringes of the environmental movement, now serves as a template for federal climate policies contained in a White House executive order. And true to Foreman’s Wildlands vision, Biden’s 30 x 30 would “create new political realities.”

   This has not escaped the attention of congressional representatives from districts and governors of states that would bear the brunt of what they fear is a massive federal land grab in the making.” (LINK)

   So now, given the severity of PHAC’s mismanagement listed above, and a growing number of Canadians no longer trustful of PHAC’s mismanagement, does it not stand to reason, when people see references to LAND USE, along with the term ONE HEALTH (which seeks to minimize human health to set it on par with the health of animals, plants, insects, microbes and the like) that they are evermore distrustful? What can the authors of the bill do to believably assure Canadians that this bill is NOT intended to pave the way for displacing rural, agricultural, hunting and fishing populations under the guise of “reducing pandemic risk”?

MISSING FOCUS ON “LESSONS LEARNED”

In the fall of 2023, a few reports were being heard about these statements in Bill C-293:

(Preamble) Whereas it is critical to build on the lessons learned from previous outbreaks of serious diseases, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Ebola virus disease (EVD), Zika virus disease, tuberculosis, H1N1 flu and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19);

(3) (d) take into account the recommendations made by the advisory committee following its review of the response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Canada.

On Oct 25, 2023 one non-mainstream news outlet (LifeSiteNews) reported on actions taken to removing the requirement to have a public review of pandemic measures. (LINK)

Liberal Members of Parliament (MPs) on the Commons health committee opted for a closed-door review by Minister of Health advisers of how the Canadian government handled the COVID-19 “pandemic” insteadof launching a public inquiry, according to information obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter.  

“Confidence has been tested and it has been shaken,” New Democrat MP Don Davies said. “The only way to restore confidence in the public is to have the courage to have a full, broad, root to branch, transparent and searching public inquiry into how the Covid-19 pandemic was handled.”

Bill C-293, titled “An Act Respecting Pandemic Prevention,” was sponsored by Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith. The bill suggested that the cabinet “establish an advisory committee” to conduct a two-year review of the government’s pandemic management.

Davies sought to have the bill amended to further allow a full judicial inquiry under the Inquiries Act.

“We need to have an impartial, independent, public and properly resourced inquiry to undertake this work,” he argued, pointing out that the public inquiry would “have the power to subpoena documents” and force federal authorities to testify under oath.

However, Liberal MPs on the health committee voted 5-2 to reject the amendment and Conservative MPs abstained, dismissing the entire bill as flawed.

 “The Liberal government has chosen not to have a pandemic inquiry,” Conservative MP Stephen Ellis said. “It would appear by this bill the Liberal government doesn’t wish to have a public inquiry, that they would be satisfied having a private member’s bill.”

Earlier, Conservative MP Ted Falk warned the Commons that Bill C-293 seemed pointless because “Canadians will never get the answers they deserve if the ministers who perpetuated or promoted many of the failures, abuses and violations of Charter rights that we have seen over the past two years are the same ones tasked with reviewing their own government’s response.”

5. How and why did Members of Parliament let Bill C-293 pass third reading WITHOUT this crucial “Lessons Learned” component?

6. Even if Liberals are motivated to keep up the appearance of having effectively dealt with the whole COVID matter, will NDP, BQ, CONS and INDEP senators allow this bill to pass MINUS “lessons learned”, especially given that NDP MP Don Davies pushed for a full scale inquiry?

7. Are any of the Senators aware of the extensive work done by the commissioners of the National Citizens Inquiry? The NCI listened to over 330 professional and lay witnesses provide sworn testimony over 27 full days from 8 cities across the country. Have Senators contacted the NCI to see if someone has correlated the recommendations published by the NCI with the various points in Bill C-293? https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/commissioners-report/ (If anyone did, they will definitely find Bill C-293 lacking MOST of the recommendations made and focussed primarily on tangential issues.

For further details on the topics of Lessons Learned, readers can visit https://www.canadaexitwho.org/c-293-alternative.

ONGOING FINDINGS RE: SARS-CoV-2; COVID PREVENTION, TREATMENT, VACCINE INJURY, mRNA INJECTIONS

Section (3)(b) requires people to “take into account the best scientific information available”

It is clear that the Members of Parliament who allowed C-293 to arrive at its current state have neglected to ensure they were working with “the best scientific information” available.

8. How does one determine “best”? Given the growing recognition that simply to have research peer reviewed is not a guarantee of QUALITY or LASTING AUTHORITY, what other measures need to be taken to ensure that decision makers are apprised of current evidence based research?

Over the course of history, many diligent scientists have battled against resistance when their newer findings rattled the established orthodoxy. Canadians are increasingly becoming aware of the concept of corporate capture within our academic and regulatory institutions. Senators need to become aware of this phenomenon as well. It is twinned with the corporate capture of our goverment and corporate media outlets. Continually, new research findings are published and discussed among independent (non Pharma funded) scientists and researchers.

9. How can we ensure that those who are to implement Health policy at all levels are kept up to date of newly noted findings AND THEIR IMPICATIONS for health improvement? At the very least, Bill C-293 should address this question but IT DOES NOT.

Below, we list just a tiny fraction of new COVID-19 related news stories that are likely NOT MAKING THEIR WAY into the awareness of our decision makers. (Why can this media outlet report on these topics and others, more “mainstream” not?)

• https://slaynews.com/news/major-study-discovers-off-switch-covid-mrna-shots/

• https://slaynews.com/news/bombshell-study-directly-links-sudden-deaths-surge-covid-shots/

• https://slaynews.com/news/japan-links-covid-shots-201-dangerous-diseases/

• https://slaynews.com/news/major-study-discovers-off-switch-covid-mrna-shots/

• https://slaynews.com/?s=japan

World Council for Health issues call to boycott corporations sponsoring 100-day & self-replicating bioweapons

The list is endless.

Come back for more additions as I move many “bookmarked” sites here!!!

10. Is it any wonder, if there is a near total media blackout on mainstream media outlets that those writing the text of Bill C-293 have no clue of the harms around the “standard” pandemic mitigation being recommended… vaccinating (i.e. using unpredictable mRNA technology), vaccinating into a pandemic, isolating, masking, locking down, etc. ?

OTHER KEY CONCERNS WITH BILL C-293

See https://www.canadaexitwho.org/bill-c-293 for more.

For example, this list prepared by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance provides much food for thought (as do of course, the many other items on that webpage.)

(See more here.)