Tags

, , ,

Norm’s note: I await Councillor Gower’s reply if he ever does. One can always hope.

22 September 2021

Dear Councillor Gower,

Prospective hirees of the City of Ottawa are being informed that they must be fully vaccinated before they can even be considered for employment by the City.

Consequently, the situation they face is the following: if a person has been holding off on getting vaccinated for perfectly legitimate safety concerns, the City of Ottawa insists that she must gamble with the possibility of compromising  her health merely for the privilege of being considered an applicant for a job that she may not even gain.

Can the City vouch for the “safety and efficacy” of the vaccines despite the manufacturers of the vaccines themselves forgoing such claims and thereby having themselves contractually exempted from all injury related liabilities? 

And if the City does attest to the “safety and efficacy” of the vaccines, on what warranted bases of evidence does it do so?

It is obvious, however, that in a fashion directly analogous to that of the manufacturers of the vaccines, the reason the City of Ottawa will only screen for employment an applicant who is already fully vaccinated is that it thereby exempts itself from any liability that may be associated with the vaccination of that applicant, and yet it is the City itself that is making the vaccination a precondition merely for being considered an applicant for hire. If this isn’t illegal — though it most probably is — it is surely deeply unethical, in that the City is deliberately shifting the full burden of possible injuries from the vaccines entirely onto the applicant for a vaccine that the applicant justifiably may not want but that the City itself is pushing and making obligatory. What makes this even more onerous, is that an applicant who by dint of economic pressure reluctantly gets vaccinated in order to be allowed to be considered for employment by the City may not in the end even get hired, so that the vaccination she would otherwise have foregone might then become a completely pointless exercise and one that may even result in either crippling injury or even death.

The following information proves beyond any doubt that applicants who have misgivings about the glibly claimed “safety and efficacy” of the vaccines are entirely correct to question and mistrust that claim:

  • The following is a presentation prepared by Dr. Jessica Rose (PhD, MSc, BSc) for the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, specifically on the issues of the “safety” and “efficacy” of COVID vaccines, and that incontrovertibly demonstrates that the harms of the vaccines outweigh the benefits: https://youtu.be/Y4MViwU3XOo
  • The following is an open letter written by a  “concerned group of health professionals who choose to remain anonymous due to threats of discipline and termination” and addressed to Dr. Henry, Mr. Dix and Mr. Horgan, responsible for British Columbia’s mRNA vaccination policy, and that nicely summarizes many of the known safety concerns associated with the COVID vaccines:  Open-Letter-by-Okanagan.pdf
  • The following is the preprint of a medical study, posted September 16, 2021, that finds that ” myopericarditis overall was approximately 10 cases for every 10,000 inoculations,” i.e.,approximately one case of myopericarditis for every thousand mRNA vaccinations:  https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v1.full

I could, of course, provide you with hundreds of additional links to actual evidence contraindicating the use of the mRNA vaccines even as emergency use prophylaxes, but you are busy, and besides, the four links I’ve provided to you are more than adequate to the purpose of alerting you to an already substantially large and growing body of scientific evidence demonstrating the falsity of the claim that the vaccines are “safe and effective.” 

In light of that evidence, how can the City of Ottawa possibly justify that a prospective applicant for employment with the City of Ottawa must first be fully vaccinated before even being  formally considered an employment prospect, let alone mandating what are as yet untried and experimental and demonstrably failing biologics, as yet under interim order in Canada, as a condition of employment for all City of Ottawa employees? 

In a society where the livelihoods of the majority depend upon being employed for a wage and where the options for employment are limited, what the City of Ottawa is engaging in can only be described as medical coercion. 

I would like, therefore, to have it clearly explained to me, as a constituent of your ward, how the City of Ottawa can possibly justify that coercion.

Sincerely yours,

Norman Pilon