The statement

“Breaking out of Alberta, today, mandatory masking is coming to an end.  Kids will not be masking when they return to school, mandatory quarantine will be ending, contact tracing, testing for mild symptoms, it’s all done.  They will now be recognising covid as a mild flu and treating it as such.  Freedom has won in Alberta, proving that fighting does work”.

The source

Stew Peters, interviewing Canadian citizen Patrick King, 3 August

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/08/freedom-fighter-court-victory-ends-masking-shots-quarantine-in-alberta/

My take on it

First, some background.

I am grateful to Rumble for the following potted summary:

“Patriot Patrick King represented himself in court after being fined $1200 dollars for protesting against the Covid-Hoax, he slew the beast and emerged VICTORIOUS. He issued a subpoena to the Provincial Health Minister for proof that the so-called Covid-19 Virus exists, and they were forced to admit that they had no evidence whatsoever. The virus has never been isolated, and thus the government had no legal grounds to impose any of the punishing restrictions they have inflicted on society. Since this shocking confession came to light, the Province has since rescinded all Covid-Restrictions and now officially treats Covid-19 as nothing more than a mild flu! WE WON

King has shown the template to be followed WORLDWIDE. This is what can happen when you are not re-presented by a BAR (British Accredited Registry) Lawyer who’s first obligation is to the Corrupted Courts and not their client.”

Now a little more history, from the Stew Peters interview with King.

On 5 December 2020 Canadian citizen Patrick King was found in breach of an order of the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Alberta Canada (Deena Hinshaw), the order being ‘in response to the Covid-19 pandemic’ and the breach relating specifically to being found in an assembly of more than 10 people.  King was fined $1,200.

King appealed.  When he appeared in court on 4 May he laid out the information that he would need in order to prepare a proper and plausible defence.  In particular it included evidence of isolation of the SARS CoV-2 virus.

The matter of ‘Deena Hinshaw vs Patrick James King’ was scheduled to be heard in Red Deer Provincial Court on Monday 19 July 2021.

On Wednesday 14 July  Mr King subpoenaed the CMOH under s. 699 of the Criminal Code requiring her to bring “all white papers describing the isolation of the COVID-19 aka SARS-CoV-2 virus in human beings, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient”, because “these white papers would have been integral in the crafting of the statutes made under the “Public Health Act” here in Alberta”.

Three days later King was advised that his court action had been cancelled; and so he had to get it rescheduled.

King was then subpoenaed by Deena Henshaw’s lawyers to appear at a hearing in chambers.  At that hearing a lawyer for Teena Henshaw said, “Mr King has been requesting evidence that we cannot give.”

By the time the matter proceeded to court, on Saturday 24 July, it had escalated, being re-worded as ‘Her Majesty The Queen vs Patrick James King’, and with Attorney General Prosecutors from Ottawa attending. Again King reported, and the court noted,  the inability of the CMOH to provide the evidence he had requested.

The point of King’s challenge is that the covid-related health policies developed and implemented by the Alberta Provincial Government and its CMOH are premised on the existence of a specific infectious agent;  and yet they cannot produce evidence that such an agent even exists.

The consequences of this legal precedent are surely huge.  They imply, as Peters said, ‘the death of covid’.

In his interview King references the Rook vs Alberta case, ‘where they summonsed everyone who had violated any of these Covid rules … they are waiting on the determination of thousands and thousands of tickets and summonses …’  These cases will presumably be dismissed.

Now that King knows the successful approach recipe, he is keen to get the word out:  “What they need to do is challenge the Public Health Act, because  then the judge has no recourse than to subpoena the officials that are responsible for this.”

Finally, the sewer starts to clear.

Meanwhile it remains urgent to to educate the general population about the exploding number of deaths and other adverse events from ‘the jab’, which is a ‘known-to-be-harmful’ malignant response to a non-existent threat.

This 58-second clip may be a useful ice-breaker:

https://www.brighteon.com/ac54facd-6df6-49bc-9aa1-4523c19a1d4a

The speaker isn’t just anyone.  Professor Dolores Cahill is an immunologist of international renown