You can fix anything except Canada

I came across this video a few days ago.  It is a political commentary on Australian TV about the discontinuation of the AstraZeneca jabs.  (sorry you must follow the link for some reason it won’t embed)

I agree 100%.  People do have the right to be angry.  They were lied to.  They took a dangerous treatment that they did not need because the government wanted them to.

The only thing I disagree with is the end of the video when the commenter discuses different truths.  The idea of different and opposing truths is just as stupid as the idea the government does anything for your safety.  There is only one truth and the truth is none of the COVID jabs are vaccines.  They do not provide immunity therefore they do not prevent either infection or transmission.

There is also no public health benefit to any vaccine.  Vaccines, when they work, protect the person who took it; they provide personal not public protection.  Your vaccine does not protect anyone else.  This truth is very problematic for politicians taking kickbacks to mandate vaccines.  To get around this obstacle politicians maintain that the public health benefit comes from protecting hospitals.

While there is at least a kernel of truth in this, the reasoning is problematic for 2 reasons.  In socialized heath systems it is the politicians who determine the capacity of the system in the first place.  If the system gets overwhelmed for any reason it is because Politicians chose to limit system capacity in the first place.

The second reason is that these mandates are oddly specific to situations where big pharma makes profits.  People are forced to take vaccines to protect hospitals but they are not forced to exercise, stop smoking, stop drinking, or eat properly.  Hospitals are full of people who make these poor health choices but it is the unvaccinated that can be denied service?

With the COVID jabs there is a third reason the “protect hospitals” logic does not hold.  These treatments do not prevent infection or transmission.  They don’t even prevent serious injection.  At the peak of the vaccination programs hospitals were full of fully jabbed and boosted COVID victims.

Mandating vaccines is wrong, mandating dangerous, unnecessary, treatments that don’t even work is obscene.  Most of the world is waking up to that.  Sadly Canada is not most of the world.  In Canada we will only concede that remote workers might not need to be jabbed.

A labour arbitrator has struck down part of Canada Post’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy for employees, ruling it was unreasonable to suspend staff without pay who worked remotely simply because they did not confirm they were vaccinated.

The ruling says the policy’s purpose was to limit the risk of COVID-19 transmission in the workplace. But Flaherty says that purpose was not met when it was applied to a handful of employees who had no reasonable chance of ever seeing their colleagues at the workplace because they worked entirely remotely.

Isn’t that nice?  If you are a hermit living and working in a remote location, the government will leave you alone, next time.  For everyone else though Canadian courts are clear.  The government has every right to hold you down and inject you with anything they want.  That might seem like hyperbole but that is essentially what a British Columbia judge just ruled.  The judge ruled that 4 years later it is completely appropriate to force a treatment, which does not work, for a virus that no longer exists, on health care workers.

I have railed about the Canadian judiciary before.  Canadian judges are appointed for ideological purity rather than competence or even intelligence.  Nowhere is that more evident than in this latest decision.  This decision is so remarkably stupid I am sure it will be used in special education classes as inspiration to the students that anyone can become a judge in Canada.  I have cut a few of the more ludicrous parts of the decision below.

On the claim that COVID-19 was no longer “an immediate and significant risk” to public health in B.C., Coval determined “transmission of the virus continued to pose an immediate and significant risk to public health throughout the province, justifying the ongoing use of the emergency powers.”

The virus wasn’t a significant threat until sociopaths like Bonny Henry started pushing the jabs.  Now that people have stopped taking the jabs the threat is gone.  COVID is now one of the least likely reasons to die yet this judge thinks it is an immediate risk.  It wasn’t even an immediate risk at the peak of the pandemic for anyone who was not already on deaths doorstep.  There never was an emergency and their certainly is no emergency now but this judge believes the absence of an emergency is a good reason to extend emergency powers.

On the claim that unvaccinated health-care workers posed no greater risk to vulnerable patients, or the health-care system generally, than vaccinated workers, Coval sided with Henry’s evidence that a fully vaccinated workforce mitigated transmission risks.

If the jabs were vaccines then unvaccinated staff would pose no risk to vaccinated vulnerable patients.  The judge is either clueless as to how vaccines work or knows damn well these treatments are not vaccines.  He is Stupid and/or dishonest which makes him a perfect politician but a horrible judge.

Coval noted that he was not assessing the veracity of the scientific evidence but rather whether the evidence supported Henry’s claims. As such, since the vaccine has been proven to reduce transmission and rates of hospitalization, the mandate was generally justified.

And indeed, the mandates did so, Coval ruled; however, they did so within reason “to achieve the essential public health objectives of protecting vulnerable patients, residents and clients from serious illness and death, and safeguarding the functioning of the province’s health-care system.”

If it was not for the next stupid thing he said this would have been by far the most stupid thing I have heard this year.  He claims that he is not ruling on the validity of the science but then claims unequivocally that the vaccines prevented transmission and saved the hospitals.  How is that not taking a side and ruling on the “science”?  If he was not going to consider the science his ruling should have been based solely on individual rights and past precedent.  Those things are clear, vaccine mandates are not legal.  So he let “science” override the law while claiming he was not ruling on the “science”.  How the hell does that work?  Exactly how insane do you need to be to think this makes sense?

And now we get to the most stupid statement from his ruling.  This is the same statement made by our idiot Prime Minister.  No one was forced to take the vaccine.  You could have chosen unemployment without any eligibility for unemployment assistance.  Take a chance on the jab or take a chance on starvation; a completely normal everyday decision.

“The orders did not compel them to accept unwanted medical treatment, and so did not interfere with their bodily integrity or medical self-determination,” stated Coval.

The judge even one upped Trudeau on the level of stupidity.  Somehow a treatment with over 2000 life altering or ending side effects does not interfere with bodily economy.  Canada is broken.  You cannot fix a country where idiots sit in judgment over people.  The courts, police, and politics in Canada are corrupted beyond repair.