• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Disobeying an unlawful/unethical order - Mandatory Vaccinations

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,136
Points
1,010
Honest question: Part VI of the NDA speaks to 'aid to the civil power' in response "a riot or disturbance of the peace" that is beyond provincial capabilities. What was the basis for the military's assistance during Covid, forest fires, Toronto snow storms, etc. Is it simply a request for federal assistance during a declared emergency (and, of course, the military being the only government department with capacity to respond)?
I can only speak to one of those, and it was the Toronto snowstorm. I was an Ops O

I had lived in Toronto, at that time, for 9 years. No winters had seen any significant snowfall since I was posted there. In fact, the Lake Ontario "effect" and the size of the city made sure that very little snow fell or endured.

That changed significantly in 1999. Toronto got hammered snow-wise by three major snow storms in less than two weeks. The city had also recently gotten rid of a vast array of snow removal equipment under amalgamation (hence, a perfect storm).

Consequently, the City of Toronto had no capacity to deal with this.

When the IRU, based out of Petawawa (RCD) arrived, after driving for five hours, the second Capt I spoke to stated "There is more snow in Petawawa'" and my response was along the lines of "yup, got it."

The MND at the time was from Toronto. Weigh that with what you will.

Having said that, we deployed a number of Bisons at paramedic stations to act as ambulances. They could get through where no other vehicle could act, and they delivered., and saved lives.

The Request for Assistance is actuated by the provincial EMO (Emergency Management Office) when they determine that municipal/provincial resources are not sufficient to deal with a crisis, In this case Toronto was clearly out of their depth.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
What was the basis for the military's assistance during Covid, forest fires, Toronto snow storms, etc.
Mayor Lastman said his biggest concern was that when the snow melted there could be flooding.

The army assisted by cleaning the catch basins and shovelling around fire hydrants.

He also appreciated the capabilities of the Bison armoured vehicles.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
747
Points
1,040
Different generation. We both know children back then had more daily hardships so the Blitz would not have been so much of an extreme hardship. Let's also be fair here, a German 250lb bomb is equally as effective at killing someone regardless of their age. COVID19 not so much, and if we're going to say comparisons to Flu is apples to oranges, Blitz comparisons are apples to rolex watches.
Sorry, kids are kids,...it's todays parents who perceive them to be weaker.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
Back in the dark ages - as a six-year old in the 1950s - I and millions of my classmates were regularly vaccinated for all kinds of stuff. Never did get smallpox, or polio, or diphtheria or any of the host of things that were killing kids in the thousands ten or twenty years earlier.

But then we had playgrounds like these:

aQojxrW_460s.jpg

14_115024720-1024x686.jpg


When did six-year olds become so fragile and precious?

😉
My uncle was a policeman in Toronto and told me the swings in children's playgrounds were locked on Sunday's. "Nobody swings on a Sunday."

Back in the dark ages - as a six-year old in the 1950s - I and millions of my classmates were regularly vaccinated for all kinds of stuff. Never did get smallpox, or polio, or diphtheria or any of the host of things that were killing kids in the thousands ten or twenty years earlier.
(y)
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,436
Points
1,040
Honest question: Part VI of the NDA speaks to 'aid to the civil power' in response "a riot or disturbance of the peace" that is beyond provincial capabilities. What was the basis for the military's assistance during Covid, forest fires, Toronto snow storms, etc. Is it simply a request for federal assistance during a declared emergency (and, of course, the military being the only government department with capacity to respond)?
As you point out, Aid of the Civil Power (the proper legal term is "of" not "to") deals with riots and disturbances. Note that under the ACP a provincial government can demand assistance from the Feds albeit that the CDS decides the nature and amount of assistance the military will provide.

There are a number of other situations under various pieces of legislation where the federal government can provide assistance to a provincial government or other federal agency in a matter that is generally not a direct military matter.

Under s 273.6 of the NDA the Governor in Council can authorize by order the military to "perform any duty involving public service" if such assistance is in the public interest and the matter cannot be effectively dealt with without military assistance. This is liberally interpreted.

There are several Orders in Council as well that are effected under the Crown Prerogative such as military assistance to the Dept of Fisheries under PC 1970-1512

The MND also has the ability to provide military assistance to other Fed Govt departments by way of a memorandum of understanding such as the one made with the Solicitor General respecting assistance to the RCMP counter drug ops or with Fisheries as to ship and air fisheries surveillance.

Then there's the Federal Emergencies Act which gives the Fed Govt temporary powers to take exceptional measures in a national emergency which is a temporary event seriously endangering the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such a nature or proportions as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with. Disease is considered a public welfare emergency for the provisions of the Act.

I don't have any actual knowledge of what provisions are actually being used at this time and as you can see from the above there are several that might be applicable (such as 273.6 public service duty; the Emergencies Act; and interdepartmental MOUs).

🍻
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,136
Points
1,010
Since March 2020. We've locked them away from their friends, forbid them to touch anything and forced masks on their faces for a virus that's really significantly less dangerous than any other seasonal virus they are exposed to normal. We're sacrificing their mental and social well being to try to save ourselves, and its not even working.
You were the initiator of the case for current kids. I stated that kids have faced far worse in the past and come out alright. You also stated in your post above, that we (I) am sacrificing my kids mental and social well being by trying to save ourselves..

I have four kids. Their safety and well being is my primary concern. To diminish that concern diminishes you.
 
Last edited:

Ludoc

Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
Different generation. We both know children back then had more daily hardships so the Blitz would not have been so much of an extreme hardship. Let's also be fair here, a German 250lb bomb is equally as effective at killing someone regardless of their age. COVID19 not so much, and if we're going to say comparisons to Flu is apples to oranges, Blitz comparisons are apples to rolex watches.

The blitz killed about 43,000 people. 1940s Britain had a population of about 44 million. So it killed about 1 in every 1000 people.

COVID19 has killed 132,000 in Britain. Their current population is about 66 million. So far it has killed about 1 in 500.

So, apples are about twice as likely to kill you as rolex watches.

Disclaimer: these are back of the envelope calculations with lots of rounding and all numbers are sole sourced from Wiki/Google
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
Different generation. We both know children back then had more daily hardships so the Blitz would not have been so much of an extreme hardship. Let's also be fair here, a German 250lb bomb is equally as effective at killing someone regardless of their age. COVID19 not so much, and if we're going to say comparisons to Flu is apples to oranges, Blitz comparisons are apples to rolex watches.

The blitz killed about 43,000 people. 1940s Britain had a population of about 44 million. So it killed about 1 in every 1000 people.
So, apples are about twice as likely to kill you as rolex watches.

A lot of study went into the effect of morale bombing on civilians.

Investigation seems to show that having one's house demolished is most damaging to morale. People seem to mind it more than their friends of even relatives killed.
There seems little doubt that this would break the morale of the people.
Our calculation assumes, of course, that we really get one-half of our bombs into built up areas.

It's pretty hard to compare targeted civilian morale bombing to an indescriminate infectious disease.

At least if one, or an entire family, survives Covid, they have a home to return to when discharged from hospital.
 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
342
Points
810
My uncle was a policeman in Toronto and told me the swings in children's playgrounds were locked on Sunday's. "Nobody swings on a Sunday."


(y)
In stuffy olde Toronto, I suppose reflecting the nation at the time but in the extreme, virtually nothing happened on the Christian sabbath; no movies, little booze, transit on limited service ('Sunday only' stops, usually in front of churches). I remember being pestered to enforce the demon of Sunday trucking under the Lord's Day Act. Good times.
As you point out, Aid of the Civil Power (the proper legal term is "of" not "to") deals with riots and disturbances. Note that under the ACP a provincial government can demand assistance from the Feds albeit that the CDS decides the nature and amount of assistance the military will provide.

There are a number of other situations under various pieces of legislation where the federal government can provide assistance to a provincial government or other federal agency in a matter that is generally not a direct military matter.

Under s 273.6 of the NDA the Governor in Council can authorize by order the military to "perform any duty involving public service" if such assistance is in the public interest and the matter cannot be effectively dealt with without military assistance. This is liberally interpreted.

There are several Orders in Council as well that are effected under the Crown Prerogative such as military assistance to the Dept of Fisheries under PC 1970-1512

The MND also has the ability to provide military assistance to other Fed Govt departments by way of a memorandum of understanding such as the one made with the Solicitor General respecting assistance to the RCMP counter drug ops or with Fisheries as to ship and air fisheries surveillance.

Then there's the Federal Emergencies Act which gives the Fed Govt temporary powers to take exceptional measures in a national emergency which is a temporary event seriously endangering the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such a nature or proportions as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with. Disease is considered a public welfare emergency for the provisions of the Act.

I don't have any actual knowledge of what provisions are actually being used at this time and as you can see from the above there are several that might be applicable (such as 273.6 public service duty; the Emergencies Act; and interdepartmental MOUs).

🍻

Thanks for that (and thanks for the correction). I was looking for the likes of 273.6 and scrolled down the Act but not up, but, as you say, it seems they could be under a number of authorities. I was looking for the authority, not the justification.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
504
Points
1,040
In a related note; saw this good news story; they've trialed some new malaria treatments in combination with the annual vaccines and had a 70% drop in serious cases in kids. They figure this can save 400,000 a year.

Malaria trial shows ‘striking’ 70% reduction in severe illness in children

Malaria trial shows ‘striking’ 70% reduction in severe illness in children​

A study in Burkina Faso and Mali suggests combining anti-malarial drugs and vaccination could reduce deaths and hospitalisations
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
760
Points
910
For those making comparisons, the Blitz was focused on particular areas, particularly greater London. Figure out the truly affected population and recompute.

No, I don't really mean that. Don't bother: "random" and "intentional" have different effects on stress, and the comparison is pointless.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
In stuffy olde Toronto, I suppose reflecting the nation at the time but in the extreme, virtually nothing happened on the Christian sabbath; no movies, little booze, transit on limited service ('Sunday only' stops, usually in front of churches). I remember being pestered to enforce the demon of Sunday trucking under the Lord's Day Act. Good times.
Perhaps the theory was if police - the ultimate symbol of adult authority - gained the trust and friendship of young people, when those kids grew into adulthood, they would respect and trust their community police. Same way our family doctor gained our trust as children.

So when my family doctor tells me to take a shot, I roll up my sleeve.

For those making comparisons, the Blitz was focused on particular areas, particularly greater London.

Whatever the aiming points in London were, over Germany, the calculation was pretty simple.

One ton of bombs dropped on a built up area demolishes 20-40 dwellings and turns 100-200 people out of house and home.
If these ( bombs ) are dropped built-up areas they will make 4,000 to 8,000 people homeless.

There was a political, as well as economic ( de-housing factory workers ), reason for this.

One RCAF squadron was briefed by their Station Commander. He explained that the Nazis had convinced the German people that at the end of WW1 their armed forces had remained still on foreign soil and basically undefeated, and that they, the German forces of WW1, had been betrayed by politicians at home. "He then pointed to the cord running across the map to the city of Dresden, and said, 'There are going to be a lot of people in Dresden tonight who are going to find out that war can be a very nasty thing. Never again will any future German government be able to say that the country was fairly well intact but still defeated.' "
"Incidentally, it will show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do."
Battlefields in the Air: Canadians in Bomber Command page 152.

The Federal Statistical Office in Wiesbaden, Germany computed after the war that 3.7 million dwellings were destroyed in Germany, including 600,000 in Berlin alone.

It's pretty had to compare what survivors of "the Blitz" went through to Covid survivors, because at least they have a home to return to.







 

Attachments

  • 1958_09_20-500x642.jpg
    1958_09_20-500x642.jpg
    68.8 KB · Views: 5
  • doctor.jpe
    doctor.jpe
    397.6 KB · Views: 6

hattrick72

Member
Reaction score
40
Points
380
Please help me break this down.

Of the 122 cases of COVID-19 in Ottawa among vaccine-eligible residents between July 18 and Aug. 21, 80 cases were identified in unvaccinated residents or residents who received a COVID-19 vaccine under 14 days before testing positive.

Twenty-six cases were identified in partially vaccinated residents, while 16 fully vaccinated residents tested positive.


So in the top paragraph it says 42 vaccinated people tested positive. In the bottom paragraph it says 16 fully vaccinated and 26 partially vaccinated tested positive.

If I add 16 and 26 I get 42.

In the top paragraph it says 80 patients that were unvaccinated or recieved a shot less than 14 days prior. So even if you are partially vaccinated you don't get that heading until two weeks have passed.

Why does it need to be this complicated, why can't the add a little transparency and just list the numbers as unvaccinated, one shot<14 days, partially vaccinated, second shot<14 days, and fully vaccinated.....

What if 65 of the 80 cases were people that recieved their shot less than 14 days ago and that is what is giving them a positive test?
 

hattrick72

Member
Reaction score
40
Points
380
Antigens you develop do not cause you to test positive for COVID.
Regardless of the reason, it would be great to know how many have been vaccinated <14 days prior as a separate statistic.

Maybe the immune system is weaker and we require self isolation after the shot. Again provided a good portion of the 80 were recently vaccinated
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
218
Points
680

This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.
 
Top