From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

Hospitals were given money bonuses to enact dangerous protocols on COVID patients, according to whistleblower nurses who were themselves punished for speaking out.

Nurse testimonials reveal that hospitals not only used a deadly cocktail of protocols facilitating the death of patients during the COVID outbreak but punished whistleblowers, an author and researcher recently explained.

COVID policymakers “created one of the biggest terror campaigns in the history of mankind,” Ken McCarthy told Polly Tommey of Children’s Health Defense last month while sharing the most shocking findings of his tell-all interviews with nurses who worked the COVID pandemic.

McCarthy told how when he began to speak with nurses about their experiences, he realized that COVID-era hospital abuses he knew were taking place in New York City were in fact taking place nationwide due to “top down driven” protocols from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

These protocols, McCarthy said, were being “filtered through” chief financial officers (CFOs) of hospitals, because they were being “heavily” financially incentivized. And they were, according to all that he had learned from the nurses, dangerous and even deadly to those were designated COVID patients.

McCarthy went down the line naming several incentivized hospital COVID protocols that inflicted harm on these patients, beginning with the denial of anti-inflammatories like ibuprofen, as well as inhalable steroids.

“That’s the normal way you treat respiratory distress. You knock the inflammation down and you give people steroids. If you had a positive COVID diagnosis, they wouldn’t give you those basic treatments. This is like a fireman showing up at the fire and saying, let it burn a little bit more before we do anything,” McCarthy shared.

The next harmful practice hospitals used on “COVID” patients was to strap BiPAP masks on patients, a form of non-invasive ventilation that when administered improperly, caused many patients to have panic attacks.

“When you treat somebody with that, you have to warn them … It’s like if you were driving at 80 miles an hour and then one of your passengers stuck their head out the window. The wind is going down that fast. They didn’t prepare the patients, they didn’t comfort the patients. They would just slap this thing on and leave them alone,” explained McCarthy, adding that this “understandably” triggered panic attacks, at which point they were offered tranquilizers.

These tranquilizers relaxed their muscles, including their diaphragm, thereby weakening their breathing.

On top of all of this, hospitals were financially rewarded for administering the “failed drug” Remdesivir to COVID patients, the use of which McCarthy noted was halted in Africa where it was used for Ebola, because it caused organ failure.

The drug was also dropped from a clinical trial for Ebola in 2018 after it was found that it had the highest death rate of the four drugs being tested, Dr. Bryan Ardis shared in a 2021 interview. In addition, according to attorney Thomas Renz, 25.9% of those prescribed Remdesivir for COVID-19 are recorded as having died in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) database. The death rate for COVID patients prescribed Remdesivir dwarfs the fatality rate of COVID patients prescribed Ivermectin, which is recorded by the CMS database as being 7.2%.

The deadly clincher to these protocols was the invasive intubation, that is, the use of ventilators, which were also financially incentivized.

McCarthy told Tommey that such intubation is for “when you’ve exhausted every other possibility” for a patient, because it is “a dangerous procedure.”

“The nickname for it among the hospital people is the garden hose. It’s large. Then you have to give somebody a feeding tube … You can cause abrasions, you can cause bleeding, infections.”

McCarthy learned that, moreover, intubated patients are typically given anywhere from five to 15 different drugs, including analgesics like fentanyl needed for the severe pain of invasive intubation, paralytic agents, and drugs “to just knock you out.”

He explained that normally a respiratory therapy is supposed to watch over four or five intubated patients, whereas during COVID, there was typically only one such therapist “for an entire ward of people.”

“Recipe for disaster. And indeed there was disaster,” McCarthy said.

“Now, here’s the really sinister thing. If you kept (a patient) on for 90 hours or longer, you got an extra bonus,” he continued.

“Every respiratory therapist will tell you as soon as you intubate somebody, within 24 hours you’re testing to see, hey, has this person recovered enough that we can take them off the intubation? Because every day you’re on intubation, you are closer to death. That’s just a fact.”

“So by what stretch of insanity did they incentivize hospitals to keep people on for 90 hours?” said McCarthy, adding, “I’d love to know who was in that room planning out these protocols.”

The author stressed that hospitals nowadays act as corporations, and not charitable institutions like they used to be — that is, they are “bottom line people.” So when they are given money bonuses for enacting certain protocols, they simply direct their entire staff to carry them out.

McCarthy said that in order to hide these deadly protocols, hospitals punished whistleblowers, according to nurse testimony.

A group that “was literally affiliated with the United Nations,” Team Halo, who McCarthy noted was devoted to counteracting “anti-vaxxers,” “metamorphized” during the COVID outbreak into a group that went after whistleblower nurses.

“They gave out nurses’ addresses and telephone numbers. They encouraged unhinged people to show up at their door and threaten them,” said McCarthy, telling how one whistleblower nurse who lives “in the boondocks of Nevada” had people “showing up at her door” after she was doxxed.

“They also had people filing complaints against the nurses with the nursing boards. Many of them had their nursing licenses challenged,” McCarthy added.

“And these were the thugs that went out and terrorized these nurses. So not only did the nurses get abused on the job — they were all fired. Anybody that spoke up and wouldn’t stop speaking up was fired. They were also tracked down afterwards and punished. They went through hell,” McCarthy said.

McCarthy’s book about his findings, “What the Nurses Saw,” is currently being sold on Amazon and has garnered an average of full five-star reviews.

 From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

If the case is allowed to proceed, any business operator in Alberta from 2020 to 2022 who was negatively impacted by COVID orders would be eligible to join the lawsuit. Any payout from the lawsuit would come from the taxpayers, which ironically includes the business owners themselves.

Alberta business owners who faced massive losses or permanent closures due to COVID mandates might soon be able to proceed with a class-action lawsuit against the provincial government after lawyers representing the businesses were in court for a certification hearing.

The court heard from the business group’s lawyers regarding the lawsuit proposal, which comes from Alberta-based Rath & Company. Lead counsel Jeffrey Rath said the Alberta government has been placed on notice for its actions against businesses during the COVID lockdown era.

The Rath lawsuit proposal names Rebecca Ingram, a gym owner, and Chris Scott, a restaurant owner, as “representative plaintiffs who suffered significant financial harm due to (former Alberta Chief Medical Officer) Dr. (Deena) Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders.”

Well-known freedom-oriented constitutional lawyer Eva Chipiuk was with Rath in court for the certification hearing. In an X post on October 3, she shared that it was an “interesting two days in court arguing on behalf of businesses impacted by Alberta’s public health orders.”

“In the heart of democratic societies lies a fundamental principle: Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. When justice systems operate in the open, public trust is maintained. People need to witness fairness, impartiality, and due process in action,” she wrote.

“When governments operate in the light of public scrutiny, they uphold not just the law but the trust of their citizens, ensuring that governance is not just a mechanism of power but a beacon of justice and equality.”

Chipiuk shared that a decision on whether or not the lawsuit will be allowed to proceed will be coming in a few months. She noted it will be “interesting how the judge decides in this case.”

“And will be very interesting how the government responds. They had an opportunity to get ahead of this issue but chose not to. We shall see if they took the right path or if they will be catching up and making up later,” she said.

Alberta Justice Colin Feasby noted at the end of the court certification hearing that both sides made good arguments, but the earliest a decision would be ready is December 1.

In court, representatives for the Alberta government eventually conceded that Ingram could be allowed to be a representative plaintiff but questioned whether Scott could be considering his case is more officially known.

Chipiuk and Rath told the judge that the government’s public health orders exceeded their legal authority and, as a result, all businesses affected by the COVID orders should be compensated.

The government’s legal team claimed that the COVID orders were put in place on a good faith initiative and that it was Alberta Health Services, not the government, that oversaw enforcement of the rules.

If the case is allowed to proceed, any business operator in Alberta from 2020 to 2022 who was negatively impacted by COVID orders would be eligible to join the lawsuit. Any payout from the lawsuit would come from the taxpayers, which ironically includes the business owners themselves.

The Alberta Court of King’s Bench’s Ingram v. Alberta decision put into doubt all cases involving those facing non-criminal COVID-related charges in the province, which in effect has allowed the class action to get this far.

As a result of the court ruling, Alberta Crown Prosecutions Service (ACPS) said Albertans facing COVID-related charges will not be convicted but instead have their charges stayed.

Thus far, Dr. Michal Princ, pizzeria owner Jesse Johnson, Scott, and Alberta pastors James Coates, Tim Stephens, and Artur Pawlowski, who were jailed for keeping churches open under then-Premier Jason Kenney, have had COVID charges against them dropped due to the court ruling.

Under Kenney, thousands of businesses, notably restaurants and small shops, were negatively impacted by severe COVID restrictions, mostly in 2020-21, that forced them to close for a time. Many never reopened. At the same time, as in the rest of Canada, big box stores were allowed to operate unimpeded.

Class action is about ‘accountability, transparency, and justice,’ lawyer says

Before the hearing, Chipiuk said it is crucial for the public to “understand the significant impact of the unlawful public health orders on Albertans. The financial, psychological, and tragic consequences cannot be ignored.”

“At the end of the day, Premier Smith must recognize the gravity and optics of this situation. Fighting against those harmed by the Province’s unlawful orders, while the Province heavily favored the public sector over the private sector, does not foster an environment that encourages entrepreneurs or promotes business and investment in Alberta,” she wrote on X.

“This case calls for accountability, transparency, and justice. The Province must acknowledge the devastation caused by its illegal actions and stop evading responsibility. This case also presents an opportunity for Premier Smith to demonstrate to Albertans that government overreach will not go unnoticed, and those harmed by it will be compensated — principles that align with the proposed amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights.”

Danielle Smith took over the United Conservative Party (UCP) on October 11, 2022, after winning the leadership. Kenney was ousted due to low approval ratings and for reneging on promises not to lock Alberta down as well as enacting a vaccine passport.

Smith, however, has been mum on the class action as well as other lawsuits against the government that are in the works. She has promised that changes will be coming to the Alberta Bill of Rights that she said will offer Albertans more protections against government overreach.