The Poisoning Of Wells – The Lawfare
Poly Tics . Social Studies
Previous appeals to the bureaucrats and technocrats of our municipal and provincial governments in Alberta on the science and ethics of re-introducing a neurotoxin into out water supply have by and large been ignored. There were some automated ‘thank-you for contacting’ type replies from the province but no substantive attempts to address the issue. The City of Airdrie U.N. captured rubber stampers responded with the sound of crickets. There was an awkward meeting with the mayor where at one point he asked me if I thought he was ethical. Of course I wanted to reply, ‘If you have to ask, you probably aren’t’. I ended up suggesting that he ‘show me’ at the end of the meeting.
The determination of whether any person or act is ethical holds up a larger question of what is morally good or bad or morally right or wrong. The question may be flawed because it may assume that there is an understanding or agreement of what or who is and isn’t moral. What a subjective barb wire quagmire!
The following letter was written as a question of whether mass medicating a population with a neurotoxin by bureaucrats under the benevolent cause of public health constitutes practicing medicine without a license. To do so is fubdamentally against the law. This letter was also sent to the premier, the ministers of health, infrastructure, justice and municipal affairs as well as our rather pointless MLAs.
There was a time when the socialist left were passionate about saving the whale or the dolphin or the trees, were zealous in their movements to preserve human rights and enhance life. It’s clear that their movement has been co-opted by globalist technocrats that have turned them into a mob that blindly choose the destruction of life through total control.
The control and manipulation of water as a weapon of control and violence has been enhanced, along as other ‘mandatory’ interventions, where fundamental laws and rights are being violated by corporate decree.
“When a state has succumbed to corruption and violence, then those two vices will result in the state’s destruction.” – Cicero
Drink up!
Dear Mayor Brown and Airdrie City Council and Management,
Elected or not, The City of Airdrie and other municipalities seem to collectively and steadfastly ignore their duty of care or any other ethical or empathetic considerations as well as any scientific evidence that warns of the risks of allowing industrial waste and neurotoxins into the public water supply. As a corporation, The City of Airdrie no doubt has unlimited taxpayer funded legal resources to determine whether or not mass fluoridation constitutes practicing medicine without a license or to calculate the health or financial and legal risks associated with any harm this malpractice might cause.
In Alberta, Canada, practicing medicine without a license is unlawful and can result in severe penalties. Individuals or groups who are not registered or licensed with a regulatory body governed by the Health Professions Act are not authorized to provide medical services, as these services can only be offered by those with the required skills, knowledge, and qualifications. Does involuntary and unlicensed mass medication also present any violations of The Occupational Health and Safety Act? If the general public that relies on and pays for safe water is not offered any protection from chemicals and neurotoxins, what protections are offered to those that have to handle the hazardous chemicals and toxic ‘medicine’ being applied?
Fluoride is a known noxious substance, industrial waste and carcinogen. The introduction of fluoride into our water supply is contrary to law. Administering a noxious substance is a crime under the Canada Criminal Code Section 245(1).
Administering a noxious thing:
245 (1) Every person who administers or causes to be administered to any other person or causes any other person to take poison or any other destructive or noxious thing is guilty
(a) of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years, if they did so with intent to endanger the life of or to cause bodily harm to that person; or
(b) of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years or of an offence punishable on summary conviction, if they did so with intent to aggrieve or annoy that person.
Being that the citizens of Airdrie are not patients of The City of Airdrie, that does not collectively have a licence to practice, prescribe or administer medicine, The City of Airdrie would be liable for violating applicable laws including the laws of consent whereby health professionals (though in the case unlicensed) in Alberta must obtain informed consent from patients before performing any examination, assessment, treatment, or procedure. This consent can be implied, expressed orally, or in writing, depending on the situation. I do not give consent to this medical treatment and I’m sure that there are more citizens of Airdrie that would also not consent to this violation of law and malpractice if they were properly informed.
Further:
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA) can take legal action against unlicensed practitioners. They can apply to the Supreme Court for an order that allows a CPSA representative to search the property of the suspected unlicensed practitioner and seize records, assets, and other items for further investigation. Additionally, the CPSA can apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction to prevent a person from practicing medicine or posing as a licensed physician and surgeon. We know that the CPSA has a history of taking legal action against lawfully licenced and ethical doctors daring to uphold the Hippocratic oath so it’s doubtful that they would view mass fluoridation by municipalities as practicing medicine without a license. This double standard highlights much that is wrong with this ‘governing’ body or any regulatory body such as Health Canada or AHS so remedy or protection from involuntary mass medication of people with noxious substances from these regulatory bodies is unfortunately unlikely.
So what is to be done? If regulatory bodies won’t mitigate or protect people from malpractice, is the only recourse to take legal action? Even if any of us that do not wish to be unlawfully mass medicated could match the legal resources of The City of Airdrie, could we rely on a just judiciary to make the right decision? Why should the right to safe and clean water have to become a human rights legal challenge? Do The City of Airdrie or any of it’s partners and stakeholders, including any concerned regulatory bodies support human rights? To what extent?
Below is confirmation that The City of Airdrie is not lawfully licenced to practice medicine.
Message to The City of Airdrie April 24, 2025:
Does the mayor or any member of council or management have a legal medical license or permit to practice, prescribe or dispense medicine of any kind?
RE: Message from the City of Airdrie website – Confirmation # 194095
Fri 4/25/2025 10:08 AM
Good morning, Mr. Neitsch.
I can confirm that neither the Mayor nor any member of Council or management have a legal medical license or permit to practice, prescribe or dispense medicine of any kind.
Best regards,
Tammy Belsham, Team Leader, Legislative Services/Assistant City Clerk|City of Airdrie| P. 403.948.8800 ext 8487
I request a substantive response to the questions raised in this letter from Mayor Peter Brown and the Alberta Ministries that this letter has been directed to.
Sincerely,
Al Neitsch
Windsong, Airdrie
Below are more links to information that should be of interest to you. The potential harms of fluoride to children and the long term effects to neurological health in older populations cannot be overstated.
Fluoride and Pineal Gland
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/10/8/2885
The Impact of FLUORIDE on the Developing Brain
Florida Set to Become Second State to Ban Fluoride in Public Water
| That Fluoride Added to Your Town Water to ‘Prevent Cavities?’ The EPA Says It’s Hazardous Waste – Children’s Health DefenseFluoride is supposedly a “miracle mineral” when added to water to prevent tooth decay. But it’s the byproduct of phosphate fertilizer production, and is classified by the EPA as hazardous waste. That means towns and states that decide to stop fluoridating their water have to find ways — and spend big — to dispose of their remaining stockpiles.childrenshealthdefense.org |
Leave a Reply