News

President Putin has already warned such a move would risk escalation

Ukraine will keep some of its foreign-donated F16s abroad in order to protect them from Russian attacks, according to a senior Ukrainian military officer. The move risks escalating the conflict yet further, since Putin has already warned he would consider attacking Ukrainian jets stationed abroad if they are used to attack Russian forces.

A number of European nations have already committed to providing more than 60 US-made F16 jets to the Ukrainians, and Ukrainian pilots are already being trained in how to fly them. The planes are expected to be delivered at the end of the year.

Serhii Holubtsov, head of aviation in Ukraine’s air force, said that “a certain number of aircraft will be stored at secure air bases outside of Ukraine so that they are not targeted here.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned on a number of occasions that Moscow would consider launching strikes on NATO countries if they host warplanes used in Ukraine.

“If they are stationed at air bases outside the Ukrainian borders and used in combat, we will have to see how and where to strike the assets used in combat against us,” Putin said last year.

“It poses a serious danger of NATO being further drawn into the conflict.”

In March, Putin again warned Ukraine’s allies against providing air bases from where the F-16s could launch attacks against Russian forces. He said such bases would become a “legitimate target.”

“F-16s are capable of carrying nuclear weapons, and we will also need to take that into account while organizing our combat operations.”

The news comes after the US gave Kyiv authorisation to use US-made weapons against targets inside Russia. According to Russian reports, US-made HIMARS artillery were then used to strike targets around Belgorod.

In response to the authorisation, Moscow warned that the West was moving towards open conflict with Russia and a potential nuclear exchange.

Former president Dmitriy Medvedev was particularly blunt in his assessment of the situation.

“This is not ‘military assistance’ at all, but participation in a war against us. And such actions of theirs [the US] may well become a casus belli,” Medvedev said.

“The current military conflict with the West is developing according to the worst possible scenario,” he continued.

“There is a constant escalation in the power of applicable NATO weapons.

“Therefore, today no one can rule out the transition of the conflict to its final stage.”

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---

Right-wing victories across Europe, but France is perhaps the biggest story, with Emmanuel Macron calling new elections following his party’s catastrophic defeat.

Perhaps the biggest news following European Parliament elections were the results from France, which saw France’s National Rally storm into first place with 31 percent of the vote, soundly defeating French President Emmanuel Macron’s party, which scored below 14 percent.

Macron has since announced that he will dissolve parliament and call new elections due to the catastrophic result. Le Pen responded to the shock news with a message that her party would win the upcoming elections.

“The President of the Republic has just announced the dissolution of the National Assembly in a few weeks. We are ready for it. I call on the French to come and join us to form a majority around the RN in the service of the only cause that guides our steps: France,” she wrote on X.

The National Rally’s strong showing was evident across the country, with an election map highlighting where her party came in first place.

The first round of France’s parliamentary election will take place on June 30 and a second round is scheduled for July 7. 

Austria

The right-wing Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) also made history, scoring its first national election victory ever, with exit polls predicting the right-wing populists have stormed to first place in Sunday’s European elections, scoring over 26 percent of the vote.

The leader of the party, Herbert Kickl, speaking at a victory party following the celebration, said: “We are humbled and grateful for the great trust that was placed in us freedom people during the EU elections today, Sunday. This election result means nothing less than that the Austrians have made history today. Because this strong vote for us freedom people with Harald Vilimsky and his team was only possible in solidarity with the population,”

“Every vote for the FPÖ is a vote for strengthening the nation states,” said deputy state chairman Manfred Haimbuchner, “The FPÖ stands for a Europe “of self-determined fatherlands. Together, we now have to set the course so that the EU can return to a policy that does justice to the needs and realities of people’s lives.”

Germany

While Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) had a weaker result than the FPÖ, the AfD still managed to become the second-largest party in Germany with at least 16 percent of the vote. 

The party outperformed in the east of Germany, where it is now the most popular party. It also made significant in-roads with the youth vote, where it is now tied for first place among those 24 and under with the Christian Democrats (CDU), with both parties claiming 17 percent each of this youth voting bloc.

The lead candidate, MEP Maximilian Krah, took to X to celebrate the AfD’s election result, writing: I am deeply grateful to all voters and supporters. Second-strongest force in Germany, the strongest force in the East, and the best AfD result ever – wonderful! But I am most pleased with the result among young voters: plus 12 percent overall strongest force among the under-24s – that’s where I wanted to be; and it’s only the beginning. Despite all the smear campaigns, we have opened up completely new possibilities for patriotic politics.”

The AfD faced a withering campaign before the EU elections, which saw its support fall from over 20 percent just months ago. In addition, a number of right-wing parties betrayed the AfD, notably Le Pen’s National Rally, which orchestrated an effort to kick the AfD out of Identity and Democracy (ID) shortly before elections took place.

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---

Mexican union leader Rafael Riva Palacio said that ‘I personally and a group of colleagues cannot allow it, and as many times as they want to put it up, as many times as they put it up, we are going to remove it.’

(LifeSiteNews) — Workers in Mexico City who have had enough of LGBTQ+ Pride celebrations quite literally took matters into their own hands and tore into pieces two massive rainbow banners that hung at the government’s National Housing Fund for Workers (INFONAVIT) building.

Union leader Rafael Riva Palacio ordered the destruction and removal of the banners, saying that they are “unworthy.”

“I personally and a group of colleagues cannot allow it, and as many times as they want to put it up, as many times as they put it up, we are going to remove it,” said Palacio, pointing to the rainbow banner, according to a report by El País.

Carlos Martinez, the director of INFONAVIT who describes himself as “gay,” denounced on X the tearing down of the banners as an act “of barbarism, hatred, homophobia and discrimination,” and swore “The flags will be raised again and as many times as necessary.”

Two days later, Martinez posted another photo boasting that at least one of the banners had been quickly replaced.

He also said that “Members of the LGBTTTIQ+ populations had repaired the damaged flags with staples, thread and tape, proposing to use them in the 2024 Pride March.”

“The revolution of consciences is going to triumph,” declared Martinez, suggesting that those who do not accept homosexuality and transgenderism need to conform to LGBTQ+ ideology.

The tearing down of the rainbow banners comes on the heels of the election of Mexico’s woke, pro-LGBTQ+ president Claudia Sheinbaum earlier this week.

Sheinbaum has made her support of LGBTQ+ political ideology clear in recent years.

In 2022, she celebrated the legalization of homosexual “marriage” in the states of Guerrero and Tamaulipas with the statement: “Today the entire country makes progress in equal rights with the passage of marriage equality (sic) in Guerrero and Tamaulipas. I celebrate this demonstration of the will of the people and the search for justice for all men and women by both state congresses. Love is love.”

That same year, she became the first mayor of Mexico City to take part in the city’s LGBT “pride” parade.

In 2023, on the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, she posted a photo of herself to Xstating, “My dream is to continue to fight for sexually diverse people as I did in Mexico City.”

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---

The WHO is expanding its “Making Every School a Health Promoting School” initiative. Critics say the move is an attempt to bypass parental consent and expand vaccination, data collection and surveillance.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is expanding its “health promoting schools” initiative worldwide, citing flagging vaccination rates and the need to provide medical services to underprivileged children and combat alleged misinformation.

The COVID-19 pandemic is behind the latest push to expand its “Making Every School a Health Promoting School” program, the WHO said, citing “the largest disruption of education systems in history” and “the health effects of mass school closures” and other pandemic-related disruptions.

The agency said the initiative aims to “serve over 2.3 billion school-age children” worldwide.

But critics say that behind the WHO’s noble-sounding plan to expand health-promoting schools — also known as school-based health centers (SBHCs) — is an attempt to gain “a foothold in our schools,” to bypass parental consent and expand vaccination, data collection and surveillance.

Laura Sextro, CEO and chief operating officer of The Unity Project, a California-based health freedom and parental rights nonprofit, told The Defender that SBHCs are “very, very agenda-driven organizations within the school system.”

Sextro said SBHCs “will cover everything from sex education [to] radical gender ideology. They’ll be talking about driving vaccines … That is something that frankly parents should have the autonomy” over.

Valerie Borek, associate director and lead policy analyst for Stand For Health Freedom, said SBHCs will promote “vaccines, especially COVID, HPV, and influenza.”

“School-based health centers have no place in public schools,” said Sheila Matthews, co-founder of AbleChild: Parents for Label and Drug Free Education. Matthews alleged the centers allow “Big Pharmaaccess to our children, who are a captive audience.”

Nigel Utton, a board member of the World Freedom Alliance and coordinator of its Education Charter, said the WHO can’t be trusted to support the health of young people. “If it did, no child in the world would live in unsanitary conditions, or be subjected to trafficking, poor nutrition or emotional intimidation within school systems,” he said.

“Instead, the WHO wastes enormous resources on forcing vaccination programs — injecting children with dangerous chemicals including animal proteins, heavy metals and other unspecified ingredients,” Utton added.

Critics also question the involvement of private interests in SBHCs, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — and Bill and Melinda Gates themselves — in promoting SBHCs and funding the WHO’s reports on the subject.

School-based health centers give ‘Big Pharma access to our children’

SBHCs aren’t new — the concept dates back to the 1970s. The WHO, UNESCO and UNICEF have actively promoted such programs since 1995.

SBHCs are intended to offer “primary care, mental health care, and other health services in schools,” particularly in underserved communities. This includes services such as immunizations and “well-child care.”

A 2020 paper in Health Promotion Perspectives, whose lead author, Manuela Pulimeno, Ph.D., is UNESCO’s chair on health education and sustainable development, said health-promoting schoolshelp “integrate health educational goals in a holistic perspective at school” and have shown positive outcomes.

“To achieve this goal, health-related contents may be embedded in the school curricula as core discipline,” the paper states.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has endorsed SBHCs, stating they “improve access to health care services for students by decreasing financial, geographic, age, and cultural barriers.”

In the U.S., the School-Based Health Alliance promotes SBHCs. According to the alliance, about 3,900 SBHCs operate nationally, up from around 1,900 in 2012. A September 2023 study in JAMA Network Open called for “additional SBHC expansion.”

In 2022, the Biden administration issued $75 million in grants to states to expand SBHCs, while the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention incorporated SBHCs into its “Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child” model.

On a global level, “work is currently underway with early adopter countries such as Egypt, Kenya, North Macedonia and Paraguay to support governments in building a new generation of school health programmes,” the WHO said in a May 26 report.

WHO’s global standards for SBHCs include censorship and surveillance

In their report, the WHO developed eight “global standards” for SBHCs (page 3), in which school health services represent just one such standard. Other standards include school and government policies, school governance and leadership, school and community partnerships, schools social-emotional and physical environments and curriculum.

These are accompanied by 13 “implementation areas,” (page 17) calling for reinforcement of “intersectoral government and multi-stakeholder coordination,” strengthening “school and community partnerships,” curriculum development, “teacher training and professional learning” and monitoring and evaluation.

Critics say these proposals allow schools to implement vaccine programs. For instance, SBHCs have been linked to higher human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates, according to a 2022 report.

Merck, the maker of the Gardasil HPV vaccine, is a funder of the School-Based Health Alliance, whose board includes several members with ties to Big Pharma and vaccine-promoting organizations.

The Gardasil HPV vaccine is often administered to teenagers as part of school vaccination programs. In October 2023, a 12-year-old boy in France died days after collapsing and injuring himself minutes after HPV vaccination at his school.

In the U.S., several state and city government websites include vaccinations among the list of services SBHCs provide.

“Increased vaccine uptake is a mark of success for school-based health programs,” Borek said. “They’re considered an optimal place to promote and administer vaccines. In fact, schools and vaccine policy go hand in hand historically — vaccines didn’t have a strong foothold until schools mandated them for admission.”

Utton pointed out that “schools have been used to coerce and manipulate children into taking vaccinations against the will of their parents. Teachers have been indoctrinated, and those who have questioned the manipulative agenda have been ostracized.”

Borek said the “psychological pressure” a child experiences when a school authority figure recommends any kind of medical care creates a “fertile ground for pushing policy.”

Did DOJ Lawyers Commit Fraud in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding?LEARN MORE

SBHCs ‘will certainly be a tool to collect data’

Included among the WHO’s global standards for SBHCs are interventions in school curriculums and proposals to “embed school health content” in training for educators.

The 2020 Health Promotion Perspectives paper said the WHO calls for the incorporation of “health literacy” in “the core curriculum as children enter school.”

Critics told The Defender that changes like these could lead to the inclusion of non-health-related topics in school curricula under the guise of health education.

Virginie de Araujo-Recchia, a French lawyer and member of ONEST, France’s National Organization of Ethics, Health and Transparency, told The Defender that SBHCs may be “favored by the political powers in an attempt to achieve a fusion between education, citizenship and environmental causes.”

The WHO’s global standards for SBHCs also target “misinformation.” According to UNESCO, SBHCs “can … teach young people develop the critical thinking skills they need to reject harmful health-related myths and misconceptions,” noting that “This is a key in responding to pandemics like Covid-19 and HIV.”

The global standards call on schools to develop “versatile physical spaces that can be adapted to changing restrictions, as in managing the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The WHO’s global standards also contain provisions for increased data collection and surveillance in schools, with the 13th “implementation area” calling on schools to “Design, develop and share practices for collecting, storing and analysing data.”

This is linked to calls to provide “capacity-building in evaluation (e.g. data collection and analysis)” and investments “in feasible … interoperable systems for collecting and storing data from monitoring at all levels of the education and/or health system.”

According to Stand for Health Freedom, SBHCs are “completely unregulated” in the U.S.

For instance, it is unclear how HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) andthe Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act will be applied to SBHCs and students’ health information.

SBHCs “will certainly be a tool to collect data on anything from vaccine status to sexual preference,” Sextro said.

Children can become ‘health trainers of their parents’

The WHO claims SBHCs involve “all stakeholders, and particularly students, parents and caregivers.” The agency’s global standards call for “opportunities for parents … to participate meaningfully in the governance, design, implementation and evaluation” of SBHCs and their inclusion on “design teams” and governance boards.

But the WHO appears to contradict itself, excluding parents from the “system of global standards for health-promoting schools” and noting that the “target readership” of its SBHC-related documents is “mainly people in government.”

According to Nemours KidsHealth, the centers “only provide care to children with parents’ written permission.” However, the organization notes that this “permission” usually consists of “the option to sign a permission form at the beginning of each school year.”

A consent form for an Atlanta SBHC shared with The Defender says nothing about parents being notified before, during or after treatment. Last year, a Connecticut school board was sued for rejecting a government-funded school-based mental health clinic that aimed to treat teens without parental consent.

“The reason they’re doing this is because they don’t want parents to be able to exercise their rights, which is to … make medically informed decisions on behalf of their children. And so, they’re usurping the parents,” Sextro said.

“Parents need to be front and center in their child’s medical care,” Borek said. “These centers are cleaving that relationship by promoting medical assessments and treatment without the presence of a parent.”

A proposed bill in New Hampshire (SB 343) would require parents to be present when services are provided at an SBHC.

“Schools are clearly not the place to introduce school health centers,” de Araujo-Recchia said. “Our children are neither guinea pigs for mass medical experimentation nor beings to be sacrificed.”

Notably, UNESCO suggests SBHCs can help children “educate” their parents on health matters. According to the 2020 Health Promotion Perspectives paper, SBHCs can help children “become health trainers of their parents, relatives and friends, impacting positively the entire society.”

Gates ‘has a direct financial benefit’ from SBHCs

Earlier this year, Melinda French Gates announced a $23 million investment in the School-Based Health Alliance, alongside fellow billionaire MacKenzie Scott, ex-wife of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.

The Gates Foundation has also provided financial support for the publication of at least two WHO reports on SBHCs.

“The Gates Foundation and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance [founded and funded by Gates] fiercely promote childhood vaccination, and make a lot of money from it,” de Araujo-Recchia said. “This is not philanthropy at all, but a stranglehold and ideology,” citing the WHO’s partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation as another example.

Sextro said Gates “has a direct financial benefit and interest in promoting these school-based health centers, because they will directly promote everything from the pharmaceutical to the vaccine interest that he and the Gates Foundation have.”

The WHO’s global standards for SBHCs include calls for the delivery of “comprehensive school health services based on a formal agreement between schools (or local education departments) and health service providers.”

According to the School-Based Health Alliance, 21% of funding for SBHCs in the U.S. came from private foundations in 2022, while according to the AAP, “local hospitals [may] provide … financial support for SBHCs.”

The WHO “is mainly financed by private funds from companies or foundations owning pharmaceutical labs,” de Araujo-Recchia said. “The capital links between the mainstream media, digital giants, American financial giants and the WHO demonstrate real collusion.”

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---

A new study suggests glyphosate exposure could be responsible for the distinctive neurological symptoms of autism

A new study suggests that glyphosate exposure could be a key ingredient in the autism epidemic sweeping the US. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, one of the most popular herbicides in the world.

Broadly speaking, the researchers propose that autism should be viewed as a PIN1 deficiency syndrome, in which a key substance for neurological development and health (PIN1) is inhibited. The natural compound melatonin is essential for the production of melatonin, because it inhibits a substance called DAPK1, which in turn inhibits PIN1.

Image: https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.16140

Recent research has shown that glyphosate inhibits the body’s production of melatonin, which makes glyphosate a strong candidate for causing many of autism’s most distinctive symptoms, including “increased dendritic spine density, missing or thin corpus callosum, and reduced bone density.”

Since 1974 in the US, it’s estimated that at least 1.6 billion kg of glyphosate has been used in the US, or roughly 20% of total global usage of the chemical.

A 2022 study showed that 81.2% of Americans over the age of 6 have detectable levels of glyphosate in their urine.

Autism rates have skyrocketed in the US in recent decades. Currently, 1 in 36 children in the US is diagnosed with autism, up from 1 in 150 children just 20 years ago.

Some possible factors to explain the rise that have been proposed include better awareness and screening for the condition, changes in diagnostic criteria and environmental or genetic factors.

The authors of the new study caution that glyphosate use should be “curtailed” so that proper investigation of its effects can be discovered.

“Given the ominous rise in the incidence of autism now happening around the globe, we believe it is imperative that distribution and use of glyphosate be curtailed immediately, while the mechanisms behind its potential connection to autism—and possibly a wide range of other diseases—can be definitively confirmed or ruled out through additional detailed research.”

Glyphosate has already been linked to cancer, endocrine disruption and obesity.

Roundup was previously manufactured by Monsanto, until Bayer bought the company in 2016 for $66 billion.

Bayer has faced tens of thousands of lawsuits, at a cost of billions of dollars, over harmful effects attributed to the use of Roundup products.

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---

The Australian Senate has initiated an inquiry into the surge of excess deaths since the 2021 COVID vaccination program, marking the first formal parliamentary examination of this issue worldwide.

(LifeSiteNews) — The Australian Senate has begun an inquiry into excess deaths since the mass vaccination program of 2021 in an effort to isolate the causes of what is described as the worst level of excess mortality since World War II. It is being touted as the first instance in the world of a Parliament formally examining the issue.

The successful motion, brought by United Australia Party (UAP) Senator Ralph Babet, was his fifth attempt to launch a parliamentary inquiry in two years. Previously, the left-wing Labor government and the Greens had blocked the motion, without explaining why. The Senate’s Community Affairs References Committee is now required to investigate the factors contributing to the abnormally high mortality. The report is expected by the end of August.

It will be a difficult task, and the likelihood that there will be any admissions of wrongdoing by government bureaucrats and politicians is vanishingly small, even if the findings compellingly point to the vaccination program as the reason behind the excess deaths.

A range of excuses and misdirection will be used to confound the picture. The most obvious is the point that correlation does not prove causation. It will likely be argued that just because the excess deaths happened at about the same time as the mass inoculations it does not necessarily mean there is a causal connection. This is true, but it only means that the evidence is circumstantial, which is valid and can be conclusive, especially when there is no obvious alternative explanation and similar surges in deaths have been observed in most countries that were heavily vaccinated.

READ: US gov’t scientists received $710 million from Big Pharma during COVID, watchdog finds

There are likely to be arguments about the precision of the data and the establishment of an appropriate base line. There is little doubt about the overall trend. The Australian Actuaries Institute sounded the alarm in early 2023. But a favoured tactic of bureaucrats is to argue over fine detail in order to distract from the big picture.

There will thus need to be work to get precise data, if that is possible. For example, according to Babet on March 26 this year, the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) provisional mortality figures “confirm that to November 2023 there were 15,114, or 10 percent, more deaths than the baseline average.”

Different figures are in an article in globalresearch.ca (referencing figures from Mortality Watch). The excess death figures were below 4 percent in 2021, just under 14 percent in 2022, and just over 7 percent in 2023.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has different figures again: -3.1 percent in 2020 (when politicians were saying a deadly pandemic was ravaging the country), 1.4 percent in 2021, 10.9 percent in 2022, and 9.1 percent in 2023. These inconsistencies will have to be resolved.

Ed Dowd, author of Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 & 2022, observes that Australian data has several limitations, one of which is that it “does not allow us to observe the excess mortality in younger age groups with sufficient detail.” His figures, which are broken down by age, show that the excess deaths were worst for most ages in 2022 and then declined in 2023. The exception was the 75-84 age bracket, where excess deaths rose in 2023.

Another likely tactic is that it will be argued that the problem is “multi-factorial”: that the deaths were caused by many things. This will have some truth to it – the lockdowns probably led to increased suicide rates, for example – and it is likely that it will be used to confuse the picture. But it will not explain the size of the excess mortality, which is the equivalent of what happens in a war. To explain that a novel reason is required, not causes of death that have existed for a long time.

READ: UK study of children shows heart inflammation develops after COVID vaccination, not infection

The aggregate mortality statistics are not the only relevant data; there are other pieces of evidence that can help fill in the picture. One is that the excess deaths, which have occurred in all age groups, do not seem to have been the result of COVID itself. According to the ABS in 2022, when the excess deaths were at their peak, the median (average) age of death for COVID-19 was 86, significantly higher than average life expectancy in Australia. That suggests relatively few working age and younger people died from the disease. So, what killed them?

Another pointer is a report that there have been 20 percent more sudden cardiac arrests in Victoria than five years ago – and more than 95 percent of the patients are dying. “Of the 7,830 people whose hearts stopped beating due to this condition in 2022/23, just 388 survived, the latest Ambulance Victoria figures reveal,” reports the Herald Sun. The ABC, the national broadcaster, reported that many of the heart attack victims are young, but did not investigate any further.

The state government’s response has been to buy more defibrillators. There has been no mention of the vaccines as a possible cause despite accumulating evidence that the heart conditions myocarditis and pericarditis are the most commonly reported adverse events associated with the vaccines.

Especially telling has been the TGA’s response. They simply stopped reporting on myocarditis and pericarditis. Such tactics are typical of Australian bureaucrats’ efforts to protect themselves.

The biggest challenge will be analyzing causation of the deaths in an environment where most of the people providing the data have a vested interest in not having their actions exposed, especially when the evidence might show that they have committed a homicide. Australian doctors and academics are also under threat of losing their careers if they voice their doubts about the vaccines. They, too, are hardly likely to be eager to take responsibility for deadly mistakes.

It is more likely that the exposing of the truth in Australia will have to wait for the insights of experts such as Dr. Francis Boyle, who was responsible for drafting the United States’ 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act. He recently testified in a Florida court case that the “mRNA nanoparticle injections” are “biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction.”

If true, it seems very unlikely that Australian health authorities knew. The TGA admitted that it just followed the FDA’s recommendations throughout the crisis. But given that it is supposed to be their job to know it is no excuse.

---

EXCLUSIVE: Canadian Gov. Attempts To Euthanize Woman Paralyzed By COVID Shots

---