Ontario court issues interim injunction against UHN vaccine mandate

The Ontario Superior Court has issued an interim injunction against the University Health Network’s (UHN) attempts to terminate a group of unvaccinated employees.

This comes after six UHN employees — some of them nurses —  brought forward an urgent motion to the court on Friday afternoon, the deadline UHN set to terminate those who had not yet received the COVID-19 vaccine.

The UHN covers Toronto General, Toronto Western and Princess Margaret Hospitals, among other facilities.

“The harm raised by the applicants is potentially serious and cannot be undone,” wrote Ontario Superior Court Justice Sean Dunphy, in a decision issued Friday. “It is alleged that some or all of them may be compelled to take the vaccine against their will because they cannot in their personal and family circumstances take the risk of being left destitute by the policy they are seeking to challenge.”

Vax-pass Defeated – Town Staff Standing Up To NH Council & Doug Ford – Complete Shutdown Threatened #StandYourGround #WinghamWakening

North Huron town staff are standing their ground to defend their Rights, and yours. This is only the second time WFP has witnessed such heroism at this scale in the area. The first time was a few years ago when North Huron volunteer firefighters all resigned to send the strongest possible message to North Huron council. Sometimes those of good conscience must take a stand no matter the cost.

The majority North Huron town staff are refusing to disclose their personal medical information and not recognizing Doug Ford’s “vax-pass” mandate. According to sources, Huron Perth Public Health is not only refusing to do enforcement at Buck & Jo’s, they are now also refusing to enforce the mandate on all North Huron property, including the rec center. If they did attempt enforcement, it would cause a massive shutdown of our Community & government.

Those that stood against segregation and for our Charter Rights should consider this a massive victory. Please share ASAP, as this will not be allowed in most FB groups.

Pfizer bullied, blackmailed government officials to push covid vaccines and maximize corporate profits

Public Citizen has published a report that outlines how drug giant Pfizer created secret contracts and used its monopoly power to manipulate governments into buying and dispensing its Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines.”

As one of the top vaccine producers under “Operation Warp Speed,” Pfizer used its position of power to “silence governments, throttle supply, shift risk, and maximize profits,” according to Public Citizen.

“Behind closed doors, Pfizer wields its power to extract a series of concerning concessions from governments,” said report author Zain Rizvi, a law and policy researcher at Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines program.

“The global community cannot allow pharmaceutical corporations to keep calling the shots.”

Back in February, it was reported that Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech were “bullying” Latin American governments during contract negotiations about the injections. Pfizer targeted Albania, Brazil, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, the European Commission and Peru with predatory contracts.

In some cases, Pfizer asked some of these countries to put up their sovereign assets as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases. In other words, it was already known in advance that the jabs were going to harm people, thus leading to lawsuits, and Pfizer wanted to protect itself while still raking in maximum profits.

“We dug into Pfizer vaccine’s contracts,” Rizvi tweeted.

“They offer a rare glimpse into the power one corporation has gained to silence govts, throttle supply and shift risk in the worst public health crisis in a century. Govts must push back to ensure global access.”

Pfizer is an agent of darkness fueling all kinds of evil to feed its greed

As we reported, Pfizer was also caught harvesting tissues from live babies that had already been born in order to conduct tests on its jabs.

These were not unborn “fetuses,” as abortion advocates like to call them, just to be clear. These were actual babies who had already come out of the womb and who were basically tortured to death so Pfizer could make more money for itself.

A thorough breakdown of the Pfizer contracts that ultimately came out of all this horrific testing on innocent human beings found that the vaccine giant basically strong-armed governments into betraying the public trust while immunizing Pfizer from all legal liability for the shots.

In Brazil, for instance, Pfizer demanded the right to silence the government and neuter its ability to hold the company accountable for late deliveries or other issues that might come up in relation to mass distribution of the jabs.

Pfizer also barred poorer countries from receiving donations of its vaccines from richer countries, prohibiting the latter from “donating, distributing, exporting, or otherwise transporting the vaccine” in and out of countries without the company’s permission.

In the event that someone tried to steal Pfizer’s intellectual property, the company inserted language into contracts that shifted enforcement responsibility from itself onto the countries buying its vaccines.

Any other matters that came up involving potential legal action were also required to be done privately rather than in public courts, shielding Pfizer from having to receive potentially unsavory news coverage.

Finally, Pfizer made sure to insert punishment clauses into the contract language that would allow it to go after a country’s assets if it did not pay whatever amount of money Pfizer demanded.

“Most of us have sacrificed during the pandemic; staying distant to protect family and friends,” said Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines program, accusing Pfizer of “taking advantage of countries’ desperation” with these heinously predatory contracts.

“Pfizer went the other way, using its control of scarce vaccines to win special privileges, from people that have little choice.”

Big Pharma is arguably the most wicked entity on the planet. To learn more, visit ChemicalViolence.com.

Sources for this article include:




Christopher Columbus’ Crusade against Jihad

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Another Columbus Day has come and gone.  Although it was “celebrated” with the usual denunciations and outraged wokeism concerning the Italian explorer’s alleged “genocide” against the natives, one influential voice came to Columbus’s defense: on October 11, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a proclamation, an excerpt of which follows:

“Columbus stands a singular figure in Western Civilization, who exemplified courage, risk-taking, and heroism in the face of enormous odds; as a visionary who saw the possibilities of exploration beyond Europe; and as a founding father who laid the foundation for what would one day become the United States of America, which would commemorate Columbus by naming its federal district after him.”

While all this is true, Columbus stands for and is a reminder of something else that is now little known if not completely forgotten: he was, first and foremost, a crusader—an avowed enemy of the jihad; his expeditions were, first and foremost, about circumventing and ultimately retaliating against the Islamic sultanates surrounding and terrorizing Europe—not just finding spices.

When he was born, the then more than 800-year-old war with Islam—or rather defense against jihad—was at an all-time high. In 1453, when Columbus was 2-years-old, the Turks finally sacked Constantinople, an atrocity-laden event that rocked Christendom to its core.

Over the following years, the Muslims continued making inroads deep into the Balkans, leaving much death and destruction in their wake, with millions of Slavs enslaved. (Yes, the two words are etymologically connected, and for this very reason.)

In 1480, when he was 29, the Turks even managed to invade Columbus’s native Italy, where, in the city of Otranto, they ritually beheaded 800 Christians—and sawed their archbishop in half—for refusing to embrace Islam.

It was in this context that Spain’s monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella—themselves avowed crusaders, especially the queen, who concluded the centuries-long Reconquista of Spain by liberating Granada of Islam in 1492—took Columbus into their service.

They funded his ambitious voyage in an effort to launch, in the words of historian Louis Bertrand, “a final and definite Crusade against Islam by way of the Indies.” (It, of course, went awry and culminated in the incidental founding of the New World.)

Many Europeans were convinced that if only they could reach the peoples east of Islam—who if not Christian were at least “not as yet infected by the Mahometan plague,” to quote Pope Nicholas V (d.1455)—together they could crush Islam between them.   (The plan was centuries old and connected to the legend of Prester John, a supposedly great Christian monarch reigning in the East who would one day march westward and avenge Christendom by destroying Islam.)

All this comes out clearly in Columbus’s own letters: in one he refers to Ferdinand and Isabella as “enemies of the wretched sect of Mohammet” who are “resolve[d] to send me to the regions of the Indies, to see [how the people thereof can help in the war effort].”  In another written to the monarchs after he reached the New World, Columbus offers to raise an army “for the war and conquest of Jerusalem.”

Nor were Spain and Columbus the first to implement this strategy; once Portugal was cleared of Islam in 1249, its military orders launched into Muslim Africa. “The great and overriding motivation behind [Prince] Henry the Navigator’s [b. 1394] explosive energy and expansive intellect,” writes historian George Grant, “was the simple desire to take the cross—to carry the crusading sword over to Africa and thus to open a new chapter in Christendom’s holy war against Islam.” He launched all those discovery voyages because “he sought to know if there were in those parts any Christian princes,” who “would aid him against the enemies of the faith,” wrote a contemporary.

Does all this make Columbus and by extension Ferdinand and Isabella—not to mention the whole of Christendom—“Islamophobes,” as those few modern critics who mention the Islamic backdrop of Columbus’s voyage often accuse?

The answer is yes—but not in the way that word is used today.  While the Greek word phobos has always meant “fear,” its usage today implies “irrational fear.”  However, considering that for nearly a thousand years before Columbus, Islam had repeatedly attacked Christendom to the point of swallowing up three-quarters of its original territory, including for centuries Spain; that Islam’s latest iteration, in the guise of the Ottoman Turks, was during Columbus’s era devastating the Balkans and Mediterranean; and that, even centuries after Columbus, Islam was still terrorizing the West—marching onto Vienna with 200,000 jihadis in 1683 and provoking America into its first war as a nation—the very suggestion that historic Christian fears of Islam were “irrational” is itself the height of irrationalism.

Note: The above account on Columbus was excerpted from and is documented in the author’s book Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.