Following Up on My Meeting with Regina Watteel (Author of 'Fisman’s Fraud')
More evidence archived for your use
“The main purpose of writing this book for me was to prevent this kind of fraud from happening again” - That's what Regina Watteel, the author of "Fisman's Fraud" book, told me when we met last week.
I bought two copies of "Fisman's Fraud" books (one from Amazon and the other directly from the author with autograph).
One of these copies I want to share with my friends and colleagues, who would never hear about this fraud otherwise, because it is not kind of news that legacy media likes to talk about.
The other copy is for myself - I want to document all beautifully presented wisdom and evidence that is there so that these can be easily perused and used elsewhere, including for litigations, many of which - I know - are currently happening across our country. For this purpose, I have created a page on the IVIM.ca portal, where quotes and evidence from this book are being gathered. You may wish to bookmark it: https://www.IVIM.ca/nci/fismans-fraud.
Here’s just one piece of wisdom and evidence from the book - from the very last section of it, called AFTERWORD. Just read it and pass it over to everyone around you.
AFTERWORD: Beyond Fisman: The Human Factor
When I began writing this book I had planned to include a discussion on the social impact of the faux pandemic science and anti-freedom movement of which Fisman and his colleagues have played a significant role. That venture quickly became unwieldy.
Far too many people's lives have been turned upside down by the onslaught of scientifically unsupported pandemic measures (attacks)that threatened every aspect of daily life in Canada.
In early 2022, the unrelenting government overreach sparked a nation-wide freedom movement. This grass-roots movement, the Freedom Convoy, exposed the heavy-handed lengths the Trudeau government was willing to go to in order to quash those who challenged their pandemic narrative. The Canadian government's enactment of the Emergency Act (EA) turned a powerful piece of legislation, meant for times of war or national emergency,against peaceful protesters.While the EA proved to be a drastic measure, unfortunately it is indicative of how the entire pandemic response has been managed.
Key to the government's overreach has been the bastardization of science as a means to subvert the Charter and facilitate the conversion of rights into privileges. Sadly, the fraudulent study by Fisman, Tuite and Amoako scrutinized in this bookis indicative of the deceptive science that has plagued our nation throughout the pandemic. A particularly effective tactic has been to drown society in a deluge of garbage studies while censoring rational counter voices and cancelling individuals who refuse to play along …
We're at a Tipping PointWhen pondering whether draconian policies are likely to resurface it is instructive to question: Why wouldn't they?
The government was hugely rewarded during the pandemic, granting itself immense power and control while spending what seemed like endless amounts of money. So far, there has been little (if any) accountability for policy failures and drastic human rights violations. Far from admitting mistakes or any wrongdoing on their part, many officials deny that any such violations even occurred.
The reality is, the COVID-19 pandemic has been very successful in advancing many political and technological pursuits that under normal conditions would have been met with significant barriers.
Prior to their emergency use approval, no nucleic acid vaccines had been licensed for therapeutic use in any country (Croft, 2023, as cited in Dockrell, 2022). Shielded by the perceived emergency, genetic-based vaccines were rushed onto the market, completely bypassing any community-level discussion or debate on the ethics of administering gene-based therapeutics to healthy recipients. Now, with well over 80% of the and therapeutics, including upcoming annual flu shots.
Both PM Justin Trudeau and his deputy prime minister, Chrystia Freeland, publicly boasted about how the pandemic provided a great opportunity to accelerate their pre-pandemic efforts on other unrelated fronts and allowed them to usher in policies or programs that under normal circumstances would have encountered substantial pushback. Politicians gained confidence that oppressive tactics will be effective when pursuing other political or ideological agendas, given the massive demonstration of social obedience in the face of flimsy, rather contrived evidence.
We are at a tipping point. Safeguards need to be restored, new ones put in place,and officials held accountable for their decisions, else future restrictions are all but guaranteed. The infrastructure for exploitation has been set and the political desire is certainly there. It is up to the citizens to see to it that it doesn't happen again.
For those who have stood up against the tyranny, you have my deepest gratitude. I can only hope my efforts provide some assistance in the fight.
Thank you for reading.
What is really interesting now to watch is how Fisman's Fraud exposed in this book is making its way to trigger an inquiry in the House of Commons.
First, it was referenced in Canadian Parliament last month by Conservative MP who questioned the government’s justification of the ArriveCAN app to surveil, control and segregate COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated Canadians (see YouTube below)
Now, just last week, an Order Paper Question (OPQ) was filed towards the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) last week, quoted below.
House Publications - Questions
Source: https://www.ourcommons.ca/documentviewer/en/44-1/house/sitting-293/order-notice/page-9
Q-24622 — March 19, 2024 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and its funding of the study titled “Impact of population mixing between vaccinated and unvaccinated subpopulations on infectious disease dynamics: implications for SARS-CoV-2 transmission”:
(a) to what funding opportunity stream, and what application criteria, did Fisman et al. submit their grant application and receive funding approval;
(b) when CIHR conducted a peer review of this application prior to funding, (i) which researchers were assigned to conduct this review, (ii) what were their qualifications, (iii) what were their conclusions, (iv) what were their conflicts of interest;
(c) how much funding did CIHR grant this study project; (d) were there any other funding agencies or entities supporting this study; (e) if the answer to
(d) is affirmative, who were the other funding agencies or entities;
(f) what was the expected timeline for study completion at the time of funding;
(g) what conflicts of interest were listed for the grant applicants at the time of funding;
(h) was there any federal government involvement with, or communication regarding, any component of the application review process, research study, or media outreach;
(i) if the answer to (h) is affirmative, which government bodies were involved;
(j) what are the details of the media communications once the study was completed, broken down by (i) subject, (ii) type of communication, (iii) who directed the communication, (iv) date of communication;
(k) after the study was published, did CIHR receive any negative feedback;
(l) if the answer to (k) is affirmative, (i) what was that feedback, (ii) how was it addressed;
(m) what is CIHR’s average timeline from the day a grant application is received to when the grant is approved; and
(n) what was the timeline from the day the grant application was received to when the funding approval decision was made for the above-captioned study?
The CIHR has 45 calendar days to provide a response to questions digging into allegations that the study was bogus — and one that Liberals even mentioned in the House of Commons when justifying their vaccine passports that kept many COVID unvaccinated individuals barred from work, travel, and restaurants.
You can read more about these new developments from Regina’s X (twitter) or elsewhere (e.g. thecountersignal.com, Rebel News). It will be interesting to see how CIHR responds…
And, by the way …
Have you heard about the latest legal ruling in Ontario - where Arbitrator ruled that Toronto hospital did not have grounds to terminate two employees who refused the COVID-19 vaccine?
Source: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2024/2024canlii19827/2024canlii19827.htm
That’s how the Arbitrator explained her decision :
"While a result of the grievors’ exercise of their right not to be vaccinated meant they were not in compliance with the Hospital’s policy, the mere fact that the grievors were unwilling to have a vaccine injected into their bodies cannot fairly be characterized as an act of insubordination, or some other culpable conduct."
“I find the hospital did not have cause to terminate the grievers’ employment, either on a disciplinary basis or on non-culpable grounds.”
Can you imagine now what this latest Arbitrator decision means for thousands of other Canadians who have lost their jobs because of vaccine mandates, especially knowing now that these Vaccine Mandates were justified using fraudulent Fisman’s modeling studies?..
So, our (concerned Canadians') job is simply to allow more time for the Domino Effect to happen and for the House of Cards to fall, while not giving in to intimidation and ostracism from those whose actions (or lack thereof) have led to those fraudulent studies and those illegal actions that we are now witnessing being exposed.
To help the process, we can also keep logging all the such wins and new evidence that we are now getting almost every week. And, it is for this reason that the pages have been created on the IVIM portal, where all of these are logged:
Currently this includes:
Trudeau: "not forcing anyone to get vaccinated"
Schwab: "What we are very proud of now, as a young generation, is that leaders like Prime Minister Trudeau, and others have acknowledged our influence in penetrating the cabinets."
Sounds like scientists should do a better job educating nonscientists about the way science works. The author is obviously ignorant about the scientific process.
Thanks so much DG for this.