#violating COVID-19 protocols

[mariacallous]

The father of televised presidential debates was Newton Minow, most famous for saying television was a “vast wasteland” as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under President John F. Kennedy. But years before that, as an advisor to Illinois governor and presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson, Newt made the case for debates, and Stevenson, championing the idea, helped make it happen for the first time with the Nixon-Kennedy debates in 1960.

That was followed by a 16-year hiatus, until, with Minow’s active participation, we got debates back with Ford and Carter in 1976. To institutionalize them, the leaders of both parties subsequently agreed to create a bipartisan structure to make them a regular showcase for elections. The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was born in 1987 under Minow’s tutelage. It ran the general election debates from 1988 on, building on a format that had three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate, usually on university campuses, with a series of events and programs involving students, faculty, large audiences of foreign dignitaries, and observers, all trying to make debates a fundamental feature of elections. The Commission was the catalyst for debate commissions in many countries, including emerging democracies.

Debates International, representing 40 democracies and nascent democracies, said this in a statement about the Commission1:

The CPD does not simply organize debates. The Commission establishes standards for integrity and professionalism that inspire debate organizers across the globe. The CPD’s commitment to transparent and participatory democracy reaches beyond U.S. borders. It offers a model to follow for both emerging and strong democracies.

The CPD debates are a testimony to the power of democracy. They provide a neutral and accessible platform and guarantee that the electoral process is representative of the will of the American people. This platform has been key to building more robust democracies around the world, inspiring leaders and citizens to value and defend electoral transparency.

At different times in the past, I have participated in CPD programs at presidential debates—at University of Massachusetts Boston in 2000, University of Miami in 2004, Hofstra University in 2012 and University of Nevada, Las Vegas in 2016. My wife, son, and I also attended the first presidential debate in Cleveland in 2020. The CPD has also been supportive and helpful in the summer debate camp our Matthew Harris Ornstein Foundation has sponsored for public school kids in the DC area—including letting the students in our first camp, in 2015, use the actual podiums Barack Obama and Mitt Romney used in 2012.

The Cleveland experience was, to be sure, a traumatic one. The Commission and the Cleveland Clinic had put in place stringent COVID-19 protocols. Attendees were tested that morning with results that afternoon, with the full monty, not instant, tests. The audience was small, with seats having separation and with excellent ventilation. Masks were required. We sat in the audience not far from where the Trump entourage came in, sat down, and removed their masks. A Cleveland Clinic doctor went over to them—Trump family and staff—and asked them to follow the protocols and were met with a figurative middle finger of defiance. Trump’s congressional guests, including Jim Jordan and Marsha Blackburn, walked around maskless, delighting in flouting the rules. And we learned later, to our horror, that Trump had tested positive for COVID-19 before the debate, a despicable and reckless violation of rules and standards.

Many criticized the Commission for allowing this fiasco. But sitting there, in the venue, I realized that Trump and his guests had put the Commission in a no-win situation. They first had accepted the assurances of the Trump campaign that he and the others had tested and tested negative—they had, in fact, not arrived early enough for the Clinic to do the clinical test. And if the Cleveland Clinic representative had tried to eject the Trump group from the debate set right before it was ready to start, it would have created a scene that would have been seized upon by Trump and destroyed the entire debate process.

Of course, we had the debate itself, where Trump screamed, shouted, interrupted, lied, kept talking long after his allotted speaking time was up, and bullied moderator Chris Wallace. But as I viewed the debate after, not in the live moment when I was nauseated by the spectacle, two things stood out. First was that viewers—voters—had seen Biden being calm and collected and with a grasp of the issues as Trump ranted and dissembled. Second was a seminal moment: when Chris Wallace asked Trump about white supremacist groups and specifically the Proud Boys, he defended them and gave them the message “Stand back and stand by.” When January 6 occurred, and the Proud Boys were at the center of the violent insurrection, Trump’s debate statement tied him even more directly to the effort to overturn the election.

Like many others, I have my own critique of the debate structure. I would like to see questioners who are experts, not just prominent journalists, who, no matter how capable, do not have the depth to follow up on shallow assertions by candidates with second and third probes, or to contradict every misstatement or distortion. And it is clear that moderators must have the ability to cut off the microphones of candidates who violate the rules by talking over their opponents or talking well beyond their allotted times.

Perhaps the two debates that Trump and Biden have agreed to do outside the Commission’s aegis will come off well, with ground rules that at least allow the mike cutoff (assuming Trump will show up without the ability to bully without consequence the moderator and his opponent.) But by moving away from the stellar bipartisan group that has managed debates for the past nine presidential elections, we will lose the guarantee that debates will continue to be a regular, institutionalized feature of our elections. Candidates will have an easier time avoiding debating when there is no structure in place in advance. We will lose the link that other countries have relied on to legitimize debates, and the value to college campuses, students, and many others for having the debates and the programs that accompany them.

Whatever their flaws, debates do give us some window into the candidate’s perspectives, and they are especially valuable for voters who generally pay little or no attention to politics. And even for those of us who follow politics for a living, debates are often illuminating. We should work with the Commission to reform its processes to make the debates better. But I am certain that if the CPD disappears, we will regret it down the road.

[darkmaga-retard]

The state of Kansas has filed a consumer protection lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, accusing it of misleading the public when it comes to both the safety and efficacy of its highly controversial mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

According to the suit, Pfizer knew that its vaccine came with significant adverse effects and manipulated its safety trials in order to deceive the public, violating Kansas’s consumer protection laws as well as previous consent judgments.

The suit cites a slew of supporting evidence, including scientific and government research, press releases, interviews, and news reports demonstrating Pfizer’s misdeeds.

For example, they cited a paper from the New England Journal of Medicine and an FDA memo to support the allegation that Pfizer purposely destroyed the control group of a COVID vaccine trial by providing participants with access to the jab. This made it impossible to fairly evaluate the safety of the vaccine by comparing a vaccinated group to one that was not vaccinated, the lawsuit alleges.

In addition, they cited two articles from the British Medical Journal indicating that Pfizer delayed the release of vaccine trial data intentionally and only tested healthy patients in its vaccine trials in a marked departure from what is considered protocol.

To support their allegation that the company purposefully misrepresented the vaccine's safety, they included press releases from Pfizer and interviews with CEO Albert Bourla in which the vaccine is presented as safe and effective.

The lawsuit also refers to

[maximumwobblerbanditdonut]

Did PCJ and SH take COVID-19 protocols seriously? Because their behaviours showed the opposite.

PCJ and SH in People’s chat have pointed out how Covid protocols were followed, during the filming of Love Again (previous title Text for You) when PCJ was stranded in London with her husband to shoot the film in 2020.

In reality, there are some deviations from how PCJ and SH understood following the COVID-19 protocols, infringing the Covid restrictions. It's not the fault of the pandemic 😷 or the Government, and don't blame the virus for having irresponsible behaviour with actions that broke the UK COVID-19 rules and British Film Commission coronavirus guidance.

PCJ was reportedly in violation of the strict UK lockdown rules, to curb the rising number of Covid-19 cases. She was photographed visiting the salon alongside her mother and dog open privately to colouring her hair, saying it was for a film role. PCJ didn't say which film her mom would be in, to allow enter the salon with her.

The Met Police were alerted to reports of a Covid breach taking place within hairdressers. The regulations stated that ‘personal care services’, including salons and spas, should close. Hairdressers by law shouldn't have been opened, she should have been fined with the hairdressers. There are no excuses for her actions. No one is above the law— They thought they didn’t have to do the lockdown like the rest of us?

On the other hand, her co-protagonist SH has a history of breaking the law during the Covid-19 pandemic. At that time the reality regarding the COVID-19 pandemic was true and it was surprising to see SH and some cast of the film not knowing how to behave during this period and acting confused thinking that they were schoolmates in the playground at Lunch time. Why would the rules be any different for them?

Social distancing cost every production a fortune during the pandemic. Which was the result? You can't control what an actor (Covidiot) does at all times? Face covering and social distancing was required by COVID-19 Guidance: British Film Commission (BFC), especially in enclosed areas without adequate ventilation or where cast and crew are working closely. In a lockdown, Quarantining the cast and crew of a film or series was a key part of the plan.

His quarantine with loopholes. Outside the bubble, It was prohibited him from mixing with anyone from outside during filming or training.👇He broke the rules by not covering his mouth and nose without a face mask and taking photos with strangers 😷 “The rules applied to everyone and were put in place to keep people safe.” But, SH was not very careful. That sounds like he was determined to do as He, pleased. Was that one rule for him and another rule for everyone else?

SH’s actions were “totally indefensible” as people across the country made great sacrifices every day to help beat Covid. He openly branded himself a 'COVIDIOT' after regularly flouted government guidance during the coronavirus pandemic. So we could define it in another way: he was the perfect buffoon. SH never apologised for his mistakes and selfish behaviours.

This proves PCJ and SH things that they adopted to do for fun don't really seem fun anymore. Tired of them complaining about self-distancing in their sprawling jobs while a record number of Brits file for unemployment help. They are trying to save their skins to clean up actions and behaviours in their backyard and have used their platforms to do more than complaint about how hard it is to be rich in a plague, showing a different understanding of accepting Covid-19 protocols than the rest of us. His mask slipped, and his ugly truth was revealed. People’s chat, however well-intentioned, will not change that grim reality.

Either way, we must never forget the changes that the COVID-19 pandemic, an international public health emergency, brought to our society. They could not handle the pandemic like the rest of us, showing a selfish response when no one else could do such a thing. They will be remembered, and they will live with it, forgetting the essential…… Weren't We All In This Together?

COVIDIOT... (during the Covid-19 pandemic) a person failing to observe regulations or guidelines designed to prevent the spread of disease. 😷

"of course, some covidiots used this as an excuse to breach the rules"...👆

[vomitdodger]

QUOTE: Reno Attorney Joey Gilbert and Las Vegas Attorney Sigal Chattah have filed the first Remdesivir wrongful death lawsuit (see below) in Nevada on behalf of the heir of a man who allegedly died from Remdesivir treatment for his COVID-19 diagnosis. The Sparks Family Hospital, Northern Nevada Medical center, doctors and individuals are named in the complaint. The plaintiff, in part, alleges the following:

• Patient (now deceased) was prescribed Ivermectin and HCQ. Hospital staff were instructed that under no circumstances was patient to be administered Remdesivir (Veklury) for treatment of his symptoms.

• Staff said that they would comply with patient's requests but that he could not be given the HCQ or Ivermectin because it was against hospital protocols.

• Doctor ordered Remdesivir despite objections.

• Patient was given Remdesivir and died of renal and respiratory failure a week later.

• Remdesivir is a dangerous, experimental drug

• It is medically unethical, and a violation of Nevada laws, to administer an unnecessary medical treatment.

• It is medically unethical, and a violation of Nevada laws, to administer a medical treatment without informed consent.

In October, attorneys representing 14 families have sued three California hospitals alleging wrongful death in the use of Remdesivir.

At any other time the above would be settled immediately. But given the complete corruption of it all, the commies can’t let this be a win for the people. This will get ugly. And by ugly I would not rule out some arkancides because if the family wins…think of the pandora box it opens up.

[daisiesonafield-blog]

Info for Love on Tour residency shows in LA Oct 23 - Nov 15 2022

COVID-19 protocol:

Face masks are strongly recommended.

General admission (pit tickets):

NO CAMPING POLICY: NO overnight camping allowed on Kia Forum property.

9:00AM – Early GA line begins & numbered wristbands distributed 3:00PM – Queuing for GA begins 4:00PM – From 3:00PM – 4:00PM, the venue will honor guests with early GA wristbands. After 4:00PM, all GA ticketed guests will queue as normal (first come, first served).

GA ticket holders may begin lining up at 9:00AM on the day of the show only. Queuing will begin on Kareem Court, south of Manchester.

No lines for future date shows will be permitted.

Upon arrival, each Guest who indicates they have a GA floor ticket will have a sequentially numbered wristband placed on their wrist.

Wristband distribution will begin at 9:00AM on day of show (subject to change).

GA ticket holders will be relocated by Kia Forum Management and Security Staff at 9:00AM on the day of the show to receive their early queue GA wristband.

At 3:00PM, the official GA line will be formed in the Northeast quadrant of the Kia Forum Parking Lot, near Parking Lot C.

Entering the Kia Forum parking lot and GA line indicates the Guest’s agreement to abide by all Kia Forum policies and procedures.

Guests must have a valid ticket for that day’s event in order to receive a GA wristband.

All Guests in a party must be present at the same time to enter the GA line and receive a GA wristband.

GA wristbands are provided on a first come first serve basis.

The Kia Forum encourages Guests to remain in line. Restrooms will be open for Guests that wish to remain in the queue all day.

Guests are not permitted to hold places in line for other Guests.

Loss, removal or tampering of the GA wristband will result in loss of place in the GA line. Guests may also be asked to surrender their ticket and leave Kia Forum property.

Please be respectful to other Guests in line.

Guests are not permitted to leave behind lounging items (umbrellas, chairs, tents, etc.) on Kia Forum property.

The Kia Forum is not responsible for any lost, stolen or damaged items. Personal items left behind may be removed.

Sealed water bottles are approved to enter

The following actions and items are prohibited, and any person who violates these policies may be subject to ejection without refund:

No running, pushing or line jumping

No smoking, alcoholic beverages, drugs or glass containers

No horseplay, unsafe behavior or foul language

No camping, tailgating, open flames or barbecues

No vending

No weapons, laser pens, banners, backpacks, oversized bags, video cameras, laptops, computers, tablets, professional cameras, monopods, tripods and audio recording devices.

Management reserves the right to amend or make additions to these policies at any time.

Subject to Change

Details here.

Times:

Parking: 9AM

Doors open at 6:30PM.

Opener: 8PM.

Harry: 9PM.

Here are important policies:

You may bring in non-professional or disposable cameras. Video cameras, monopods, tripods, audio recording devices and cameras with professional telephoto or zoom lenses are NOT permitted.

Laptops or tablets are not allowed.

Outside food and beverage are not allowed.

Coolers, beverages (in any type of container) are not allowed.

Sealed water bottles are approved to enter

Weapons (guns, knives, pepper spray, mace, chains, spiked bracelets, brass knuckles, etc.) are not allowed.

No face paint.

The arena is CASHLESS. Credit/debit card and Google/Apple Pay transactions only. Cash will not be accepted.

There is no reentry

Accessibility info here.

Carpooling, ride-sharing and public transportation are highly encouraged.

Parking is available onsite ($51), cash and card accepted. enter the Kia Forum parking lot via the Prairie Ave. or Kareem Ct. gates. Book in advance at your show event page here.

Parking & venue map here.

Seat map here

Costumes are permitted with some exceptions. For the safety and experience of all guests:

NO full-face coverings permitted

NO large costumes or headpieces

NO full-face paint

NO fake weapons

Please note: any hazardous or distracting item/costume determined at the sole discretion of our security personnel are NOT permitted. For the safety and experience of all guests, costumes, face coverings, etc. must be removed if requested by our security personnel.

For a complete list of policies and more details, as well as prohibited items click here and here and here.

Bag Policy

CLEAR BAG POLICY

Allowed to bring: • Clear Bags that are equal to or smaller than 12 x 6 x 12 • Clear plastic freezer bags that are 1 gallon size or smaller • Small clutches / wristlets that are 9 x 6 are permitted and do not need to be clear • Diaper and medical bags accompanied by the Guest using them

All bags are subject to search.

For more details click here

Banners, signs and flag policy:

Signs, banners must be smaller than 11” x 17”

For more details about signs click here.

Contact:

For additional questions please call the arena at 310-862-6200.  Email them here. You can also access their website. Check their twitter here and IG here for updates.

[beardedmrbean]

A church deacon in Idaho secured a legal win against his city after being arrested for alleged COVID-19 violations during an outdoor psalm sing in 2020.

"I feel vindicated by the judge, and disappointed that the city made me have to clear my name for three years," Gabriel Rench, 43, told Fox News Digital.

Rench brought a case against the leaders of Moscow, Idaho, that alleged his rights under the First and Fourth Amendments were violated when he was among three people arrested for not wearing a mask during a peaceful protest on Sept. 23, 2020, against the former mayor’s repeatedly extended public health order.

Organized by Christ Church, a local evangelical congregation where Rench was serving as a deacon at the time, the protest consisted of about 20 minutes of psalm singing in front of Moscow City Hall, where city officials had placed small yellow dots six feet apart as social distancing guidance for the participants.

IDAHO MAN ARRESTED FOR NOT WEARING MASK AT OUTDOOR WORSHIP SERVICE: ‘UNBELIEVABLE’

Footage of Rench's arrest, which went viral and was condemned on Twitter at the time by former President Trump, showed officers taking his hymn book before leading him away in handcuffs to the county jail, where he was detained for several hours.

Rench was charged with violating the city’s health ordinance, which carved out exemptions for activities protected under the U.S. Constitution and the Idaho State Constitution, including religious activity. A magistrate judge later dismissed the city's case against him, though Rench reportedly became a pariah in his predominantly liberal community following the arrest.

"Plaintiffs should never have been arrested in the first place, and the constitutionality of what the City thought [its] code said is irrelevant," U.S. District Court Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., wrote in his Feb. 1 memorandum and order denying the motion to dismiss. "The prosecutor’s charging decisions were likewise flawed."

"Somehow, every single City official involved overlooked the exclusionary language [of constitutionally protected behavior] in the Ordinance," the judge further wrote.

OHIO WOMAN ARRESTED, TASED FOR NOT WEARING MASK AT MIDDLE SCHOOL FOOTBALL GAME: REPORT

Writing that Rench's case is "one of the most novel set of circumstances the Court has ever encountered," England also ordered a settlement conference and offered to preside over it. 

"Given that Plaintiffs were wrongfully arrested, the City indisputably erred in interpreting its own Code, the City consequently misadvised its officers as to the Code’s application, and Plaintiffs are so far reasonable in their damage requests, this case should not need to see the inside of a courtroom," he wrote.

CANADIAN PASTOR REPEATEDLY JAILED OVER COVID PROTOCOLS TO FACE FINAL TRIAL: ‘CRAZY STUFF’

"The city knew from the jump that they were in the wrong, and the judge clearly stated that this was incompetence on their part," said Rench. "They even knew that their own resolution protected my First Amendment rights."

Despite his victory, Rench worries his case is an indication of growing hostility toward Christians. The former county commissioner candidate said he believes he "was a political target and a religious target."

"It's pretty obvious that there are some real principalities and powers at work," he said, referencing the sixth chapter of Ephesians. He believes "militant liberalism" is trying to seize political control around the world, and predicts Christians will increasingly be targeted in the name of suppressing so-called "Christian nationalism."

"It looks like it's just a fight between liberalism and conservatism, but I think it's a lot deeper than that," he added.

Moscow's city attorney did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

[tinyshe]

Abp. Viganò: The COVID pandemic farce served as a trial balloon for the New World Order

'There can be no neutrality, because when there is a clash between two armies, those who choose not to fight are also making a choice that affects the outcome of the battle.'

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

LifeSiteNews

Tue Nov 22, 2022 - 3:28 pm EST   

Listen to this article    0:00 / 11:13  BeyondWords

Editor’s note: Below is Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s address to Medical Doctors for Covid Ethics International (MD4CE International).

Dear and distinguished friends,

Allow me first of all to thank Doctor Stephen Frost for the invitation he has extended to me to speak to you. Along with Doctor Frost I also thank all of you: your commitment to fighting the psychopandemic propaganda is commendable. I am well aware of the difficulties you have had to face in order to remain consistent with your principles, and I hope that the damage you have suffered can be adequately repaired by those who have discriminated against you, depriving you of work and salary and labeling you as dangerous no-vaxxers.

I am pleased to be able to speak and share with you my thoughts about the current global crisis. A crisis that we can consider to have begun with the pandemic emergency, but that we know has been planned for decades with very specific purposes by well-known personalities. Stopping at the pandemic alone would in fact be a serious mistake, because it would not allow us to consider the events in their full coherence and inter-connectedness, thus preventing us from understanding them and above all from identifying the criminal intentions behind them. You too – each with your own expertise in the medical, scientific, legal or other fields – will agree with me that limiting yourselves to your own discipline, which in some cases is extremely specific, does not fully explain the rationale for certain choices that have been made by governments, international bodies, and pharmaceutical agencies. For example, finding “graphene-like” material in the blood of people who have been inoculated with experimental serums makes no sense for a virologist, but it does made sense for an expert in nanomaterials and nanotechnology who understands what graphene can be used for. It also makes sense for an expert in medical patents, who immediately identifies the content of the invention and relates it to other similar patents. It also makes sense for an expert in war technologies who knows about studies on the enhanced man (a document of the British Ministry of Defense calls him “augmented man” in transhumanistic terms) and is therefore able to recognize in graphene nanostructures the technology that enables the augmentation of the war performance of military personnel. And a telemedicine expert will be able to recognize in those nanostructures the indispensable device that sends biomedical parameters to the patient control server and also receives certain signals from it.

Once again: the assessment of events from a medical point of view should take into account the legal implications of certain choices, such as the imposition of masks or, even worse, mass “vaccination,” made in violation of the fundamental rights of citizens. And I am sure that in the field of health governance the manipulations of the classification codes of diseases and therapies will also emerge, which have been designed to make the harmful effects of measures taken against COVID-19 untraceable, from placing people on respirators in intensive care to watchful waiting protocols, to say nothing of the scandalous violations of regulations by the European Commission which – as you know – has no delegation from the European Parliament in the field of Health, and that is not a public institution but rather a private business consortium.

Just in the past few days, at the G-20 Bali summit, Klaus Schwab instructed heads of government – almost all coming from the Young Global Leaders for Tomorrow program of the World Economic Forum – about the future steps to be taken in view of establishing a world government. The president of a very powerful private organization with enormous economic means exercises undue power over world governments, obtaining their obedience from political leaders who have no popular mandate to subject their nations to the delusions of power of the elite: this fact is of unprecedented gravity. Klaus Schwab said: “In the fourth industrial revolution the winners will take it all, so if you are a World Economic Forum first mover, you are the winners” (here). These very serious statements have two implications: the first is that “the winners will take it all” and will be “winners” – it is not clear in what capacity and with whose permission. The second is that those who do not adapt to this “fourth industrial revolution” will find themselves ousted and will lose – they will lose everything, including their freedom. In short, Klaus Schwab is threatening the heads of government of the twenty most industrialized nations in the world to carry out the programmatic points of the Great Reset in their nations. This goes far beyond the pandemic: it is a global coup d’état, against which it is essential that people rise up and that the still healthy organs of states start an international juridical process. The threat is imminent and serious, since the World Economic Forum is capable of carrying out its subversive project and those who govern nations have all become either enslaved or blackmailed by this international mafia.

In light of these statements – and those of others no less delusional than Yuval Noah Harari, Schwab’s adviser – we understand how the pandemic farce served as a trial balloon for imposing controls, coercive measures, curtailing individual freedoms, and increasing unemployment and poverty. The next steps will have to be carried out by means of economic and energy crises, which are instrumental to the establishment of a synarchic government in the hands of the globalist elite.

And here, dear friends, allow me to speak as a bishop. Because in this series of events that we are witnessing and will continue to witness, your commitment could risk being thwarted or limited by the fact of not being able to see its essentially spiritual nature. I know that two centuries of Enlightenment thought, revolutions, atheistic materialism and anticlerical liberalism have accustomed us to thinking of Faith as a personal matter, or that there is not an objective Truth to which we all must conform. But this is the fruit of a propaedeutic indoctrination, one that happened long before what is happening today, and it would be foolish to believe that the anti-Christian ideology that drove the secret sects and Masonic groups of the eighteenth century had nothing to do with the anti-Christian ideology that today drives people like Klaus Schwab, George Soros, and Bill Gates. The driving principles are the same: rebellion against God, hatred for the Church and humanity, and destructive fury aimed against Creation and especially against man because he is created in the image and likeness of God.

If you start from this evidence, you will understand that it is not possible to pretend that what is happening before our eyes is solely the result of profit-seeking or the desire for power. Certainly, the economic part cannot be disregarded, considering how many people have collaborated with the World Economic Forum. And yet, beyond profit, there are unstated purposes that stem from a “theological” vision – one that is turned upside-down, it’s true, but still theological – a vision that sees two opposing sides: the side of Christ and the side of the Antichrist.

There can be no neutrality, because when there is a clash between two armies, those who choose not to fight are also making a choice that affects the outcome of the battle. On the other hand, how is it possible to recognize in your noble and high professions the admirable order that the Creator has placed in nature (from the constellations of stars to the particles of the atom) and then deny that man is also part of this order, with his moral sense, his laws, his culture, and his discoveries? How can man, who is God’s creature, presume to not be subject himself to eternal and perfect laws?

Our battle is not against creatures made of flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and Powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, against the spirits of evil that dwell in the heavenly places (Eph 6:12).

On the one hand, there is the City of God – the one Saint Augustine writes about – and on the other hand there is the city of the devil. We can say that in this era the city of the devil is clearly identifiable in neo-Malthusian globalism, the New World Order, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the European Union, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and in all those so called “philanthropical foundations” that follow an ideology of death, disease, destruction, and tyranny. And also in those forces that have infiltrated the institutions, which we call the deep state and the deep church.

On the other front, we must recognize that the City of God is more difficult to identify. Even the religious authorities appear to have betrayed their role of giving guidance to the faithful, preferring to serve power and propagate their lies. The very people who ought to be protecting and sanctifying souls are scattering and scandalizing them, calling good Christians rigid fundamentalists. As you can see, the attack is on several fronts, and thus it is a mortal threat for humanity, striking at both the body and the soul.

And yet, precisely at a time when it is difficult to find authoritative points of reference – both in the religious sphere as well as the temporal one – we see an ever-increasing number of those who are understanding, opening their eyes, and recognizing the criminal mind behind the evolution of events. It is now clear that everything is linked together, without having to dismiss those who say so as “conspiracy theorists.” The conspiracy is already there: we are not inventing it, we are simply denouncing it, hoping that people wake up from this suicidal narcosis and demand that someone put an end to the global coup. The operations of social engineering and mass manipulation have demonstrated beyond any doubt that this crime was premeditated, and how it is consistent with a “spiritual” vision of the conflict that is now unfolding: it is necessary to take sides and fight, without giving in. The Truth – which is an attribute of God – cannot be cancelled by error, and Life cannot be defeated by death: remember that the Lord, who has said of Himself, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life,” has already defeated Satan, and what remains of the battle serves only to give us the opportunity to make the right choice, to choose to do those actions which place us under the banner of Christ, on the side of Good.

I trust that this great work you are undertaking will soon bear its expected fruits, putting an end to a time of trial in which we see how the world will become if we do not turn to Christ, if we continue to think that we can coexist with evil, lying, and self-worship. After all, the City of God is the model of those who live in God’s love, self-control, and contempt for the world; the city of the devil is the model of those who live in self-love, conforming to the world and despising God.

I thank you and bless you all.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

[davecortel]

everytime i feel like giving up, i always remind myself that i survived 2020 & 2021 when people wanted academic freeze but at the same time did not believe in COVID-19 and kept violating health protocols 🥴

[oodlenoodleroodle]

Finally, the ACIP created significant structural inequities by race when they failed to account for the U.S. age distribution by race in this recommendation. The average age of a White person in the United States is fifty-eight, more than twice the average age for racial and ethnic minorities.25 Ten percent of White Americans are at least seventy-five years of age, compared to under 5 percent for minorities. By prioritizing Americans seventy-five and over, the ACIP would have doubled the relative access of White people to vaccines. Compounding this further, the ACIP ignored wide racial disparities in Covid-19 death risk at younger ages. Prior to vaccine availability, Native American, Black, and Hispanic people faced substantially higher Covid-19 hospitalization and death rates for all age brackets under sixty-five, such that members of these minority groups in the age bracket below sixty-five were often at higher risk than White Americans sixty-five and over. While the Covid-19 mortality disparity also occurred (though was less stark) in adults over sixty-five, the ACIP did not empirically demonstrate that this would counteract the fact that minority populations are half as likely to be over seventy-five. 

[superghfan]

It's been more than a year since Ingo Rademacher (Jasper Jacks) filed a discrimination lawsuit against ABC over his dismissal from General Hospital. Now, there's some movement in the case, with ABC asking a judge to toss out the actor's case. One of the key reasons? ABC says General Hospital was preparing to write out Rademacher's Jax even before the adoption of a COVID vaccination protocol.

First, some background on the situation. In 2021, ABC adopted a workplace policy that required all employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Though the policy has never been formally or publicly announced by the network, the existence of the policy became known in late 2021 when actors Steve Burton (Jason Morgan) and Rademacher were let go for failing to adhere to the then-undisclosed policy.

The vaccine mandate does allow for exemptions, including health and religious reasons. Both Burton and Rademacher have claimed that they applied for exemptions but were denied by the network. In a lawsuit filed in December 2021, Rademacher alleged that ABC's questioning of the sincerity of Rademacher's beliefs amounted to religious discrimination. Rademacher also asserted disability discrimination, invasion of privacy, and political retaliation.

"I am entitled to a religious exemption against mandatory vaccination for COVID-19 on the basis of my deeply and sincerely held moral belief that my body is endowed by my creator with natural processes to protect me and that its natural integrity cannot ethically be violated by the administration of artificially created copies of genetic material, foreign to nature and experimental," Rademacher wrote in an October 11, 2021, email to Disney's Human Resources department. Disney is the parent company of ABC.

Burton shared in a November 2021 Instagram post that he applied for both medical and religious exemptions, but both of those were denied.

The Hollywood Reporter reports that ABC claims that Rademacher "stonewalled the employee relations department during the review process and refused to give details about his religious views, claiming the questioning was discriminatory and a violation of his civil rights."

"Although Rademacher provided little information to ABC in the interactive process, what limited information he did provide, revealed that his opposition to vaccination was rooted in secular, philosophical/moral beliefs ... to summarize succinctly, at no point did Rademacher mention that his beliefs are based on, related to, or even loosely connected to any religious text or teaching," Marenberg wrote, arguing that Rademacher's objection was more about a lifestyle choice than a religious one.

As for Rademacher's claim of invasion of privacy, Marenberg wrote that "Rademacher voluntarily and repeatedly disclosed his vaccination status to others" and on social media prior to asking for an exemption.

The ABC filing also claims that in July 2021, General Hospital co-head writer Chris Van Etten was preparing to lay out long-term story plans and identified Jax as one of several characters that could or would be written off the show. "At that time, Jax's role in the ongoing storyline was negligible and Van Etten did not see a role for Jax going forward," the attorney added.

In story around that July/August 2021 period, Jax was involved in about three different plot points: Jax had slept with Britt, Jax and Carly fought over Josslyn's safety after Josslyn had an encounter with mobster Joey Novak, and Jax discovered that Sonny was living as "Mike" in Nixon Falls. The Jax/Britt story quickly went nowhere, Joey was eventually neutralized as a threat, and Jax claimed to be less concerned about Josslyn's safety once Sonny returned to Port Charles.

In November 2021, Jax announced that he was returning to Australia to handle business. In January 2022, Jax's residence was shown as being unlived in. In March 2022, an off-screen Jax divested in Aurora Media due to a "conflict of interest." The last mention of Jax came just last month when Carly shared that she had spoken on the phone to Jax and that he wanted Josslyn to visit him in Australia.

X

**This saddens me. Jasper Jacks has always been a favorite character of mine, and while I know there were other allegations made against the actor, this was an easy one to fix. I don’t know if I believe ABC’s reasoning (sounds a little convient), that they had always intended to write the character off, it still makes me very sad. I still think they should recast the character. Joss needs her Dad.

[thebreakfastgenie]

1, 4, 14, 19, 28 for the writer asks!

Finally answering this 😅

the last sentence you wrote

His gesture jostles BJ’s half-raised coffee cup and it sloshes. 

4. a story idea you haven’t written yet

Oh I have so many. Putting aside the ones I've written tiny bits of, the one I think I care the most about but haven't actually started at all is the MASH AU where the original cast works in an ICU in New York at the beginning of the COVID pandemic. I have a lot of ideas for drawing parallels between the situations and reworking certain elements of MASH. I wasn't going to spoil it but I'm pretty sure I have before and who knows when I'll get to it so what the hell: The main plot points I have worked out so far: Henry Blake, who runs the unit, finally retires/transfers/takes leave/whatever. Everyone is happy for him, sees him off, and puts him in a cab. A few blocks away he starts feeling sick, gets out of the cab to avoid further exposing the driver, walks back to the hospital, and collapses as Radar checks him in. Radar then tells the rest of the unit what happened. Henry deteriorates quickly and as he's dying, Hawkeye knowingly violates PPE protocol to give him some human contact and comfort. This leads to Hawkeye getting quarantined and he forgets his phone charger. He doesn't get sick, but when he gets out of quarantine he finds out Trapper quit. He plugs in his phone and finds several missed calls but no voicemail, only a single text message that just says "😘" Radar tells Hawkeye there's a new doctor on the unit and the story ends with Hawkeye giving BJ a tour. I have a pretty clear vision for all of that, but for the pacing to work right I need to show the day-to-day of the unit for a while and get the audience attached to this version of Henry before he gets sick. I have a few ideas based on episode plots, but they're a lot looser right now. I think Henry getting sick is really the climax so I only have like the last one third of the story plotted out.

14. where do you get your inspiration?

Most of it just kinda... happens. With fic it's usually something in the source material, but with original fiction I get inspired by very specific observations from real life, and sometimes that happens with fics too. So one time I was carrying a bottle of wine into the house and it was super icy and I imagined what would happen if I slipped on the ice and broke the bottle and that's where Chianti came from. But usually it's either something that went by quickly in the show that I want to dig into more or something that makes me say "what if?" like "what if Margaret was pregnant and got an abortion?"

19. the most interesting topic you’ve researched for a fic

You know, it's funny, I'm a researcher when I'm writing something research-able, but a lot of the fic I write is very character-driven and short so there isn't a lot of in-depth research to do. I did get into the weeds on buildings at Bowdoin College in the 1930s to make sure I was making plausible references one time but I think the most interesting was the fairly quick "is yellow fever endemic in South Korea?" (No, but it doesn't matter for my purposes.) With The West Wing I don't need to do as much research because I already have a government degree and studied that era of politics a bit. The main thing holding me back from writing my COVID MASH fic is the research, though. I need a better understanding of exactly what an ICU in a major city was like in March-Summer 2020, even if I take creative liberties I want to do it from an informed position. I'm not one of those people who never wants to hear about COVID in fiction, so I'm not put off by the topic, I'm just not sure exactly how to find exactly what I need and haven't yet been motivated to figure it out.

28. your least favorite part of the writing process

Just... being stuck. That part where you have to just sit and marinate an idea until you're ready to write it. It's maddening! I actually like everything else... I mean writing is torment but if it wasn't it wouldn't be worth it. I like writing more than having written, even when it's torturous, because the satisfaction comes in doing it.

[anth489project]

Photo #3: Freedom Convoy

This is a picture of the Sudbury branch of the Freedom Convoy. Every Saturday afternoon, from 12:30 until about 5:00, they gather in their pickup trucks in the public parking lot across from Bell park, which is the biggest and most frequented park in the city, along Paris Street, one of the main thoroughfares throughout Sudbury. They park their pickup trucks along the street, set up their tent, and walk around waving their Canada flags and "Fuck Trudeau" flags and hoisting their signs for everyone driving by to see. I'm not even entirely sure what it is they're protesting anymore, since the Freedom Convoy was originally conceived to protest mask mandates and vaccine protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic, but they seem to have their fair share of causes. I've seen signs about protecting the children (I'm not sure from whom, probably transgender people), distrusting the government, and encouraging people to do their own research before labeling them as conspiracy theorists.

I decided to use the Freedom Convoy as an example of resistance because I feel like it goes against what we normally expect of resistance and guerrilla urbanism. A lot of the examples we discussed in class, whether from Cartographies of Youth Resistance (Magaña, 2020) or from the lectures, along with the rest of the photos on this blog, tend to focus on forms of resistance from more leftist or centre-left political perspectives. I would consider the Freedom Convoy to be a far-right organization, and I'm sure many of the individuals belonging to the Convoy would consider themselves to be conservative or right-leaning as well, but they are also participating in a form of guerrilla urbanism. In Sudbury, they are gathering in a parking lot and occupying public space in order to protest against the government, as well as gathering at Tom Davies Square (municipal government office) to disrupt an open house town hall meeting and protest government actions. During the COVID-19 lockdown, a much larger group of them from across the country drove to Ottawa and occupies the capitol in order to protest COVID-19 mandates. Although we generally tend to associate guerrilla urbanism and resistance with more left-leaning groups, it's not fair to discount right-leaning groups using the same tactics (eg. occupying public spaces for protests, leaving signs and stickers on public infrastructure to promote their cause without permission) to combat oppression (whether real or perceived).

The Freedom Convoy demonstrates resistance and refusal by protesting the government and its laws that they deem unjust and/or unfair, creating online and in-person counterspaces to organize grassroots campaigns and spread their message, and choosing not to follow laws that they believe violate their freedoms. Whether you agree with them or not - and it's definitely a polarizing issue for a lot of people in Canada (although I'm not entirely sure the Freedom Convoy still exists and regularly gathers anywhere else but Sudbury_ - they are a good example of a small group's guerrilla usage of urban space for resistance.

Word count: 497

Works cited: Clarke, T. (2024, March 21). Protesters disrupt open house at Tom Davies Square. Sudbury.com. https://www.sudbury.com/city-hall/protesters-disrupt-open-house-at-tom-davies-square-8490527

Magaña, M.R. (2020). Cartographies of Youth Resistance. University of California Press.

Parliamentary Committee Notes: Evolution of the Freedom 2022 Convoy. (2022, December 20). Public Safety Canada. Retrieved July 11, 2024, from https://www.sudbury.com/city-hall/protesters-disrupt-open-house-at-tom-davies-square-8490527.

[dankusner]

Uvalde police block comments on Facebook page 

Many residents say it violates free speech

The Uvalde Police Department has faced widespread criticism for its delayed response to the gunman who entered Robb Elementary School and killed 19 children and two teachers on May 24, 2022.

That criticism extended to social media, where public outcry led to the department’s decision to disable comments on its Facebook page that previously allowed public engagement.

'The Uvalde Police Department Facebook Page is an informational page only and does not allow comments,' the department’s page reads.

A similar note appears on the city of Uvalde’s Facebook page.

Additionally, beneath each post, a disclaimer from the social media platform states, 'Uvalde Police Department limited who can comment on this post.'

Many residents assert that prohibiting comments is a violation of free speech covered under the First Amendment, but this interpretation might not be accurate.

Man sues the city of Uvalde, Uvalde Police Department for restricting comments

New York resident Michael W. Palmer sued the city and the Uvalde Police Department for $500,000 in April for their restriction on comments on their Facebook pages, according to the Uvalde Leader-News.

The lawsuit comes after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in March clarified that public officials’ online accounts might fall under state action criteria if they wield state authority and establish such authority on their posts, even if it’s on their personal accounts.

Although the ruling did not specifically outline protocols for governmental agencies, the lawsuit alleges that the city of Uvalde and Uvalde Police Department’s restrictions on Facebook comments do not comply with the recent high court’s decision because government officials run the page.

'The city does not have a lawful right to block users comments or even the users, since the Facebook Page(s), is considered ran by government officials,' the lawsuit reads.

A decision has not yet been made.

What did the Supreme Court ruling say about government official’s social media accounts?

In Lindke v. Freed, James Freed, the city manager of Port Huron, Mich., posted about the COVID-19 pandemic on his personal Facebook page.

Facebook user Kevin Lindke responded, expressing his displeasure with the city’s response to the pandemic.

Initially, Freed deleted the comments but later blocked Lindke from commenting.

Because Freed identified himself as the city manager on his Facebook page, Lindke sued Freed, alleging that his First Amendment rights were violated, as he believed the page constituted a public forum.

In the Supreme Court opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett asserted that many government officials use social media for personal communication, and in cases in which officials have distinctly separated their personal social media posts and accounts from official business, they retain their rights as private citizens and have the capability to block users and comments.

'A close look is definitely necessary in the context of a public official using social media.

There are approximately 20 million state and local government employees across the Nation, with an extraordinarily wide range of job descriptions – from Governors, mayors, and police chiefs to teachers, healthcare professionals, and transportation workers,' she wrote. 'Many use social media for personal communication, official communication, or both – and the line between the two is often blurred.'

She wrote that such officials 'may look like they are always on the clock' and it could be 'tempting to characterize every encounter as part of the job,' but they are 'also private citizens with their own constitutional rights.'

But Freed’s page was not designated either 'personal' or 'official,' and he often posted information related to his job.

In the official ruling, the Supreme Court established new guidelines and unanimously held that 'A public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official’s social-media page engages in state action under §1983 only if the official both (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts.'

What official government pages can and cannot do

Information from the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana website suggests the issue is more nuanced than the lawsuit alleges.

According to the ACLU, official government pages cannot:

Prevent people from joining a public conversation on the social media account because of their views on the topics at hand.

Block critical voices from asking for government services through the social media account because of those critical viewpoints.

Prevent people from being able to see social media posts that publicly announce government information or policy because of their viewpoints.

But the organization states that the associated page can limit other kinds of interactions, and that includes restricting all comments or deleting comments not relevant to the post.

'An official can also preclude all comments or in certain circumstances limit discussions to certain subjects,' the website states. 'In other words, government officials may have no obligation to open the social media account up for public comment, but if they do, they cannot discriminate as to which view s get to be expressed in those comments

[maximumwobblerbanditdonut]

Men in Kilts was filmed during the pandemic and breached Covid-19 rules and restrictions in Scotland. Those actions didn't help reduce the risk and didn't make it safer for everyone because the rules hadn't been lifted in Scotland. It’s not understood how they could not see the reality of Scotland’s life moment. This not be forgotten.

Started an adventure of rule-breaking, It was the way to bring the series to life. Some rapidly forget the lessons of this pandemic 😷 Don't try to cover the sun with a finger or awards.

@maryofboston Covid virus infection levels had hit a record high in Scotland and were rising across the UK. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the deepest and fastest economic contraction in the Scottish economy on record.

The coronavirus pandemic was difficult for many of us. And the government lockdown and restrictions meant there was a lot we couldn't do. Film, television and HETV production was allowed under all restrictions in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. This covered all aspects of the production process.

All staff had to comply with Scottish Government specific filming guidelines. But SH was wandering around Edinburgh to stay relevant and pushing the sightings for attention. Ignored the rules while pushing for a selfie.

The staff had to wear masks and he, as a producer, had to make sure no one acted incorrectly, but SH was the first. They should keep 2m from another person whenever possible, and a COVID-19 supervisor should always be present. Due to all these rules, STARZ-Men In Kilts violated these government restrictions and British Film measures.

It was a shoot and a series in which no one should have forgotten the rules. But we did not expect so many gaps. During the filming of Men In Kilts, he did not follow

COVID-19 protocols on social distancing rules and did not take the virus seriously.

Social distancing cost a fortune for each production during the pandemic. What was the bottom line? He couldn’t control himself, the actors and the crew at that time. No face coverings and no social distance breached the COVID-19 Guidance — British Film Commission (BFC) and GOV. UK’s restrictions 🇬🇧 🎬 Was one rule for him and another rule for everybody else?

They flouted social distancing despite the government's requirement to keep a distance of at least two meters to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. The UK was in lockdown and social distancing restrictions from March 2020 and during Men in Kilts filming that year. We had enough of watching the rules get flouted.

We followed the law and it was frustrating to see his photos during the shoots. SH and GMcT had fun and those who worked during lockdown continued to take risks, so he was able to be pleased with the way he showed he was very satisfied with his law-breaking abilities and didn't feel the need to try to correct any more difficult situation to protect others with the support of @sonypictures

[brookewalkerblog]

HIPAA Innovators: Unleashing Healthcare's Interoperable Revolution

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was enacted in 1996 to safeguard patient data and ensure the privacy and security of health information. Over the years, HIPAA has significantly influenced the healthcare industry, shaping how organizations manage patient information, enhance security measures, and adopt new technologies. This article explores HIPAA's impact on the healthcare industry, providing relevant statistics and insights from various sources.

Strengthening Patient Privacy and Security

HIPAA's primary objective is to protect patient information from unauthorized access and breaches. According to the HIPAA Journal, since the implementation of HIPAA, healthcare organizations have improved their data protection measures, reducing the risk of data breaches. A report from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reveals that in 2020 alone, there were 642 healthcare data breaches affecting over 29.3 million individuals. This highlights the critical need for stringent data security protocols mandated by HIPAA.

Enhancing Trust and Patient Confidence

The enactment of HIPAA has fostered greater trust between patients and healthcare providers. Patients are more confident that their personal and medical information is handled with the utmost care and confidentiality. According to a survey by the American Medical Association (AMA), 87% of patients believe that their health information is protected due to HIPAA regulations. This increased trust encourages patients to share sensitive information with their healthcare providers, leading to better diagnosis and treatment outcomes.

Impact on Healthcare Technology and Telemedicine

HIPAA has also significantly impacted the adoption and development of healthcare technology, particularly in the realm of telemedicine. Telemedicine apps for doctors must comply with HIPAA regulations to ensure patient data privacy and security. The growth of telemedicine, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has been supported by HIPAA-compliant solutions, allowing healthcare providers to offer remote consultations and services.

A report by Mobisoft Infotech highlights that the demand for custom telemedicine app development solutions has surged, with an estimated market growth rate of 23.5% from 2020 to 2027. HIPAA compliance is a critical factor in this growth, as it reassures patients and providers that their interactions and data are secure.

Compliance and Administrative Burden

While HIPAA has brought numerous benefits, it has also introduced compliance challenges for healthcare organizations. Ensuring compliance with HIPAA regulations requires significant administrative effort and resources. Healthcare providers must implement comprehensive training programs, regular audits, and robust security measures to remain compliant.

A study by Secureframe found that healthcare organizations spend an average of $8.3 million annually on compliance activities. Despite the financial and administrative burden, these efforts are essential to protect patient information and avoid hefty fines for non-compliance. The HHS has issued fines totaling over $130 million since 2003 for HIPAA violations, emphasizing the importance of adherence to these regulations.

Benefits of HIPAA for the Healthcare Industry

HIPAA has played a crucial role in transforming the healthcare industry by introducing standards that enhance efficiency, combat fraud, and ensure continuity of health insurance coverage for individuals between jobs. The legislation has provided a clear set of rules for healthcare professionals to follow regarding the protection of patient data, leading to improved care delivery and patient outcomes. Additionally, HIPAA has facilitated the transition from paper-based medical records to Electronic Health Records (EHRs), enabling secure access to patient information, enhancing care coordination, and reducing medical errors.

Promoting Innovation and Interoperability

HIPAA has also driven innovation in healthcare technology by promoting the adoption of interoperable systems. The need to comply with HIPAA standards has led to the development of secure EHR systems and other digital health solutions. These innovations facilitate the seamless exchange of information between healthcare providers, enhancing the quality of care and patient outcomes.

The HHS Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) reports that 86% of office-based physicians and 96% of hospitals use EHR systems. The interoperability of these systems, driven by HIPAA standards, allows for better coordination and continuity of care, especially in complex cases requiring multiple healthcare providers.

Challenges and Criticisms

Despite its benefits, HIPAA has faced criticism for its complexity and the burden it places on healthcare organizations. Critics argue that the stringent requirements can be overwhelming, particularly for smaller practices with limited resources. The complexity of HIPAA regulations can also lead to inadvertent violations, resulting in penalties that could financially strain healthcare providers.

Moreover, the rapid advancement of technology presents ongoing challenges for HIPAA compliance. As new technologies emerge, healthcare organizations must continuously update their systems and protocols to remain compliant. This dynamic landscape requires ongoing education and adaptation, which can be resource-intensive.

Future Outlook

As the healthcare industry continues to evolve, HIPAA will remain a cornerstone of patient privacy and data security. The rise of telemedicine, driven by the need for remote healthcare services, will further emphasize the importance of HIPAA-compliant telemedicine app development services. Healthcare providers and technology developers must collaborate to create innovative solutions that meet HIPAA standards while addressing the growing demand for digital health services.

In the future, HIPAA regulations may need to adapt to address new challenges posed by emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT). These technologies have the potential to revolutionize healthcare but also introduce new risks to patient data privacy and security. Policymakers must balance innovation with robust data protection measures to ensure that the benefits of these technologies are realized without compromising patient trust.

Conclusion

HIPAA has profoundly impacted the healthcare industry by enhancing patient privacy, promoting trust, and driving the adoption of secure healthcare and life science technologies. While it presents compliance challenges, the benefits of HIPAA in protecting patient information and fostering innovation are undeniable. As the industry continues to embrace digital health solutions, HIPAA will play a crucial role in ensuring that patient data remains secure in an increasingly interconnected world. The ongoing evolution of HIPAA regulations will be essential to address new technological advancements and maintain the integrity of patient information.

[rantz1]

CALL TO ACTION:

The RCMP are operating in Alberta and most other provinces Unlawfully in violation of the Canadian Constitution and are involved in Human Trafficking and High Treason connected to the compromised Winnipeg Bio-Lab and the criminal and treasonous pandemic response.

The fact that a violation of the Article VI Sec. 92( 14) of the Constitution Act 1867 is exclusively within the powers designated to the province; and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are operating within the province of Alberta without any law in force governing them based on Part VII Sec. 52(1) of the Constitution Act 1982 making the RCMP Act 1985 of no force; all provincial policing done by the RCMP constitutes an unlawful criminal act.

Take the provided 36 page PDF file and download it or copy it into an email and send it or hand deliver it to your local MLA. Then print off the pdf file and send it by registered Mail

To:

The Law Clerk

Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

Legislative Assembly of Alberta

9820 - 107 Street

Edmonton, Alberta T5K 1E7

And then SHARE this post!

Petition for Redress of Grievances

In The Thirty and First Legislature ~ Of The ~ Province Of ~ Alberta

1. THE CONSTITUTION ACT OF 1867 ARTICLE VI § 92.(14). EXCLUSIVE POWERS OF PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES, SUBJECTS OF EXCLUSIVE PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION Sec 14 The 'Administration of Justice in the Province, including the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction, and including Procedure in Civil Matters in those Courts ..

2. The Parliament unlawfully and unconstitutionally exceeded its powers granted in Article VI § 91 of the Constitution Act 1867 with the Issuance of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act 1985, circumventing § 92(14) of the Constitution Act 1867 removing control of the Administration of Justice from the Province of Alberta, and having servants of the federal crown acting against the Province of Alberta during the COVID-19 pandemic response; which protected the criminally negligent engineering protocols implemented by the Alberta Health Services by the framework constructed by Rachel Notley and the New Democratic Party directly tied to the biological weapons that are the subject of treason investigations at the Winnipeg Biolabs that preexisted the issuance of Declaration of the State of Emergency issued March 17, 2020 under the provisions of Public Health Act.

Prayer For Relief

WHEREFORE, the Petitioner and all undersigned demand the following relief and hereby instruct our public servants to discharge their duties as instructed by the People of Alberta.

3. We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to investigate the malfeasance, misconduct and gross negligence, of the NDP governments role in creating the conditions for the Alberta Health Services role in the corruption outlined in attached Appendix containing evidence filed in the State of Texas and Michigan, the corruption within the RCMP based on the federal encroachment inherent in the RCMP Act circumventing§ 92(14) of the Constitution Act 1867 and the judiciary that has concealed the aforementioned concerns, and mentioned in the attached petitions in support of this petition for Redress of Grievances.

4. We the undersigned require the Alberta Legislative Assembly create the necessary legislation and changes to RCMP policing and any other matter as needed after an inquiry before the Alberta Legislative Assembly.

5. To do an investigation to verify our claims of corruption made prominent and concealed high treason used to initiate the COVID-19 pandemic response.

We the Petitioners and all undersigned respectfully submit this Petition on the 19th day of March in the year of our Lord two thousand and twenty four.