Government’s totalitarian Covid Response a turning point in Canada’s history

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

A lawyer and former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party in Newfoundland has told the world that mishandling of COVID-19 deserves a reckoning before the world slides into totalitarianism.

In a half-hour interview with Dr. John Campbell on the latter’s YouTube channel, Ches Crosbie complained governments wanted the public to forget their “gigantic assault on the rights and liberties of Canadians.”

“No government seems to be interested in having a look back to learn lessons or to see what might be adjusted in order to make the response to any future pandemic, a more seamless, flawless and effective response. They just don’t want to do it. They have no interest in it,” Crosbie said.

Campbell, a retired nurse educator with almost three million YouTube subscribers, dryly quipped, “Presumably they’d want to do an inquiry to exonerate themselves and show how brilliant their performance was throughout the entire pandemic.”

Crosbie, an administrator for the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19, complained the 63 subpoenaed by the NCI to testify “want to run and hide” and never showed up.

“They think they have impunity. They don’t have to explain themselves or answer anything. It also speaks to their sense of embarrassment about what they did, that they don’t think they can defend themselves, even in a sympathetic environment,” Crosbie said.

The NCI report said Canada was put into “virtual state of terror.” Crosbie agreed and said “society went virtually mad” as it abandoned “principles of bodily integrity and personal sovereignty and the right of informed consent” and also Charter rights.

Crosbie pointed to the late Sheila Lewis who could not get an organ transplant due to refusing a COVID-19 vaccine.

“She passed away as a result. That is an incredible professional cruelty on the part of a branch of the medical profession which deserves to be roundly condemned. And those people need to account for it,” Crosbie said.

“The problem in Canada, maybe elsewhere, is that virtually every institution that we expected to defend our rights and freedoms and what we thought was normal life, failed us,” Crosbie explained.”

“That’s what the citizens of Canada told us. You can’t have that kind of gargantuan multi-institutional failure without deep self-reflection about what went wrong and how to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

The Rhodes scholar said by the end of the first two weeks of 2020 lockdowns, it was already apparent the “very old and those with comorbidities” had a “thousand-fold” higher risk of a COVID-19 fatality than “the young.”

“If you did want to justify that two weeks to stop the spread, then we had enough information at the end of that to know that this was not the answer, and the COVID 19 virus was not the threat to life on Earth that had been portrayed,” Crosbie said.

“That turned out to have and was argued by many at the time to have no greater case fatality rate than a seasonal influenza.”

Even so, lockdowns continued, followed by mandates for masks and vaccines, something Crosbie said demands an accounting.

“You can’t have reconciliation when those who perpetrated what the citizens of the country believe to be an unwarranted invasion of their economic, social, political and legal rights and freedoms, refuse to explain why they did it, or in any respect to account for it.

“And this is why I think that there will eventually be criminal proceedings because they are necessary, given the enormity of what’s occurred.”

Crosbie said documentation the NCI put on public record contributed to a “a tipping point” where “the truth is constantly coming out.”

Campbell agreed and said allegations of gain of function research and the origins of the virus that “appeared ridiculous, appeared conspiratorial” have been “essentially confirmed.”

Crosbie said a public shift was evident in the election of new governments in Europe with a “more critical point of view on the events of the last few years, and…the WHO power grab.” He added Canada also needed a change of government and the COVID-19 “injectable products” banned.

“How can it be safe and effective when there’s foreign DNA and simian virus in this stuff, and there are other facts beyond dispute that can be added up here to say that no one would have agreed in the right mind to receive these in the first place, had they known about it?” Crosbie said.

Campbell chidingly said, “I assume the mainstream media in Canada’s been keen to pick this up as well.” Crosbie said it was a “major problem” that they had not.

“The bottom line is you can’t have a free country if you don’t have a free press. You don’t have democracy. And that’s where we are right now, not just in Canada, but in other countries like the United States, like the United Kingdom, in Europe,” explained Crosbie.

“We’re at a crisis point in history where we were either going to have a liberal democracy with constitutional rights and freedoms, or we’re going to have totalitarianism.”

Lee Harding is a research fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Up Next

Taxpayers release Naughty and Nice List

Don't Miss

Fossil fuels aren’t going anywhere, we benefit too much from them

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Oil tanker traffic surges but spills stay at zero after Trans Mountain Expansion

COVID-19 / 4 hours ago

University of Colorado will pay $10 million to staff, students for trying to force them to take COVID shots

Censorship Industrial Complex / 8 hours ago

Justice Centre campaigning Canadian provinces to follow Alberta’s lead protecting professionals

COVID-19

University of Colorado will pay $10 million to staff, students for trying to force them to take COVID shots

Published on December 4, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine caused ‘life-altering damage’ to Catholics and other religious groups by denying them exemptions to its COVID shot mandate, and now the school must pay a hefty settlement.

The University of Colorado’s Anschutz School of Medicine must pay more than $10.3 million to 18 plaintiffs it attempted to force into taking COVID-19 shots despite religious objections, in a settlement announced by the religious liberty law firm the Thomas More Society.

As previously covered by LifeSiteNews, in April 2021, the University of Colorado (UC) announced its requirement that all staff and students receive COVID jabs, leaving specific policy details to individual campuses. On September 1, 2021, it enforced an updated policy stating that “religious exemption may be submitted based on a person’s religious belief whose teachings are opposed to all immunizations,” but required not only a written explanation why one’s “sincerely held religious belief, practice of observance prevents them” from taking the jabs, but also whether they “had an influenza or other vaccine in the past.”

On September 24, the policy was revised to stating that “religious accommodation may be granted based on an employee’s religious beliefs,” but “will not be granted if the accommodation would unduly burden the health and safety of other Individuals, patients, or the campus community.”

In practice, the school denied religious exemptions to Catholic, Buddhist, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelical, Protestant, and other applicants, most represented by Thomas More in a lawsuit contending that administrators “rejected any application for a religious exemption unless an applicant could convince the Administration that her religion ‘teaches (them) and all other adherents that immunizations are forbidden under all circumstances.’”

The UC system dropped the mandate in May 2023, but the harm had been done to those denied exemptions while it was in effect, including unpaid leave, eventual firing, being forced into remote work, and pay cuts.

In May 2024, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked the school for denying the accommodations. Writing for the majority, Judge Allison Eid found that a “government employer may not punish some employees, but not others, for the same activity, due only to differences in the employee’s religious beliefs.”

Now, Thomas More announces that year-long settlement negotiations have finally secured the aforementioned hefty settlement for their clients, covering damages, tuition costs, and attorney’s fees. It also ensured the UC will agree to allow and consider religious accommodation requests on an equal basis to medical exemption requests and abstain from probing the validity of applicants’ religious beliefs in the future.

“No amount of compensation or course-correction can make up for the life-altering damage Chancellor Elliman and Anschutz inflicted on the plaintiffs and so many others throughout this case, who felt forced to succumb to a manifestly irrational mandate,” declared senior Thomas More attorney Michael McHale. “At great, and sometimes career-ending, costs, our heroic clients fought for the First Amendment freedoms of all Americans who were put to the unconscionable choice of their livelihoods or their faith during what Justice Gorsuch has rightly declared one of ‘the greatest intrusion[s] on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.’ We are confident our clients’ long-overdue victory indeed confirms, despite the tyrannical efforts of many, that our shared constitutional right to religious liberty endures.”

On top of the numerous serious adverse medical events that have been linked to the COVID shots and their demonstrated ineffectiveness at reducing symptoms or transmission of the virus, many religious and pro-life Americans also object to the shots on moral grounds, due to the ethics of how they were developed.

Catholic World Report notes that similarly large sums have been won in other high-profile lawsuits against COVID shot mandates, including $10.3 million to more than 500 NorthShore University HealthSystem employees in 2022 and $12.7 million to a Catholic Michigander fired by Blue Cross Blue Shield in 2024.

COVID-19

The dangers of mRNA vaccines explained by Dr. John Campbell

Published on November 30, 2025

Todayville

From the YouTube channel of Dr John Campbell

There aren’t many people as good at explaining complex medical situations at Dr. John Campbell. That’s probably because this British Health Researcher spent his career teaching medicine to nurses.

Over the last number of years, Campbell has garnered an audience of millions of regular people who want to understand various aspects of the world of medical treatment.

In this important video Campbell explains how the new mRNA platform of vaccines can cause very serious health outcomes.

Dr. Campbell’s notes for this video:

Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic https://www.researchgate.net/publicat… Macro-data during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK) are shown to have significant data anomalies and inconsistencies with existing explanations. This paper shows that the UK spike in deaths, wrongly attributed to COVID-19 in April 2020, was not due to SARS-CoV-2 virus, which was largely absent, but was due to the widespread use of Midazolam injections, which were statistically very highly correlated (coefficient over 90%) with excess deaths in all regions of England during 2020. Importantly, excess deaths remained elevated following mass vaccination in 2021, but were statistically uncorrelated to COVID injections, while remaining significantly correlated to Midazolam injections. The widespread and persistent use of Midazolam in UK suggests a possible policy of systemic euthanasia. Unlike Australia, where assessing the statistical impact of COVID injections on excess deaths is relatively straightforward, UK excess deaths were closely associated with the use of Midazolam and other medical intervention. The iatrogenic pandemic in the UK was caused by euthanasia deaths from Midazolam and also, likely caused by COVID injections, but their relative impacts are difficult to measure from the data, due to causal proximity of euthanasia. Global investigations of COVID-19 epidemiology, based only on the relative impacts of COVID disease and vaccination, may be inaccurate, due to the neglect of significant confounding factors in some countries. Graphs April 2020, 98.8% increase 43,796 January 2021, 29.2% increase 16,546 Therefore covid is very dangerous, This interpretation, which is disputable, justified politically the declaration of emergency and all public health measures, including masking, lockdowns, etc. Excess deaths and erroneous conclusions 2020, 76,000 2021, 54,000 2022, 45,000 This evidence of “vaccine effectiveness” was illusory, due to incorrect attribution of the 2020 death spike. PS Despite advances in modern information technology, the accuracy of data collection has not advanced in the United Kingdom for over 150 years, because the same problems of erroneous data entry found then are still found now in the COVID pandemic, not only in the UK but all over the world. We have independently discovered the same UK data problem and solution for assessing COVID-19 vaccination as Alfred Russel Wallace had 150 years ago in investigating the consequences of Vaccination Acts starting in 1840 on smallpox: The Alfred Russel Wallace as used by Wilson Sy “Having thus cleared away the mass of doubtful or erroneous statistics, depending on comparisons of the vaccinated and unvaccinated in limited areas or selected groups of patients, we turn to the only really important evidence, those ‘masses of national experience’…” https://archive.org/details/b21356336… Alfred Russel Wallace, 1880s–1890s 1840 Vaccination Act Provided free smallpox vaccination to the poor Banned variolation Vaccination compulsory in 1853, 1867 Why his interest? C 1885 The Leicester Anti-Vaccination demonstrations (1885) Growing public resistance to compulsory vaccination Wallace’s increasing involvement in social reform and statistical arguments Statistical critique of vaccination Government data on: Smallpox mortality trends before and after compulsory vaccination Case mortality rates Vaccination vs. sanitation effects Mortality trends before and after each Act, 1853 and 1867 “Forty-Five Years of Registration Statistics, Proving Vaccination to Be Both Useless and Dangerous” (1885) “Vaccination a Delusion; Its Penal Enforcement a Crime” (1898) Contributions to the Royal Commission on Vaccination (1890–1896) Wallace argued: Declining smallpox mortality was due to improved sanitation, not vaccination Official statistics were misinterpreted or biased Compulsory vaccination was unjust Re-vaccination did not reliably prevent outbreaks These views were strongly disputed, then and now. Wallace had a strong distrust of medical authority He and believed in: Statistical reasoning Social reform Opposition to coercive government measures The primacy of environmental and sanitary conditions in health