Drastic measures justified?

On March 29, 2020 Rosemary Frei posted on her blog this question:

"Where is the Evidence Supporting the Drastic Measures Against Covid -19"

March of 2020 was the time when the World Health Organization declared the alleged epidemic of an alleged coronavirus-caused disease labeled Covid-19 to be a Pandemic. This declaration automatically activated legal commitments to the WHO by every member nation – almost every government on earth – the devastating legal power of which the citizens of these countries had been unaware. Even the leaders and politicians and legislators comprising these governments appear to have been blissfully ignorant of the implications of their commitments to the WHO until in March 2020 they and their citizens were confronted by the absolute arbitrary dictatorship of Public Health Officers.

Until that time PHOs like Bonnie Henry and Teresa Tam had been obscure little paper-pushers in the bureaucratic back water of Public Health but suddenly no politician in Canada, as Ontario Premier Doug Ford was blunt enough to say out loud, could afford to make a squeak of objection to his Public Health Officer at the risk of his career. Habeas Corpus? Gone. Constitutional guarantees of Free Speech, Freedom of movement, Freedom from arbitrary Arrest and Detention? Gone, Gone and Gone.

Following World War Two, with the revelation of such horrors as the mutilations practiced by ‘Doctor’ Mengele at Auschwitz Death Camp, the freedom from forced medical experiments had been codified into international law in the Nuremberg Code and the Geneva Convention. These commitments, entered into by our government and all other allied governments, are every bit as binding as any commitment to the WHO. But with the declaration of a State of Emergency in March of 2020 these commitments to international law were utterly defiled. Our country suddenly was reminded what it might have felt like to live in communist East Germany or even in a darker Germany of the evil past.

At the mere word of our Prime Minister, given apparently to the order of his Public Health Officer, perfectly healthy Canadian citizens guilty of no crime other than having to travel abroad were apprehended at airports, coerced into accepting an invasive swab up the nose called a PCR test (known for decades to be bogus, as its inventor, Kary Mullis, spent his career insisting) and packed off to indefinite imprisonment in secret “quarantine” hotels. Canadians were harassed and terrified by police and levied crippling fines for not covering their mouths and noses with germ soaked masks, or daring to hold church services or daring to serve customers in their small family owned businesses. Every business in this fair land (with the notable exception of big box retailers and liquor stores) was subjected to arbitrary rolling shutdowns, sending the bankruptcy rate to the Moon and beyond and sending the economy of Canada tumbling down to stasis and ruin.

All of this was and is in the service of a campaign to inject an experimental gene altering mix of chemicals and artificial molecules into every arm of everyone from the age of 12 on up to combat an alleged disease with a survival rate, if you get symptoms attributed to this disease, of 0.02% for anyone under 70. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System in the USA has reported so far (July 2021) that over 400,000 Americans have suffered serious bad reactions from the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson so (mis)called “vaccines”, the “vaccines" our government is bribing 12 year olds with ice cream to take without their parents consent. Among the injured in the USA at least 10,000 have died so far.

All of this year-and-a-half long outrage comes from the declaration of a State of Emergency in March of 2020. Now that the State of Emergency has finally been cancelled in our province as of July 1, 2021, it is time to look back on March of 2020 and ask Rosemary Frei’s question. What was the excuse for this declaration? In retrospect, was there evidence to justify it? You be the judge. Rosemary Frei:

As ever with Rosemary Frei, the entire article is still worth a read. I ask you all to ask yourselves if the passage of almost a year and a half has rendered Rosemary Frei’s questions moot or has time and new data made this article more relevant than it ever was. Isn’t the answer obvious? The questions she asked then demand answers and those answers need to be given under oath in our parliament and in our Supreme Court.