Len Faul is a retired former Inspector with the Toronto Police. He agreed to sit down with me for a YouTube interview to talk about how he and a group of active and former police officers are working to stop these unconstitutional public health measures and how we, the public can get involved to support their efforts and get our voices heard.
Their organization, called Police On Guard For Thee, is mounting a court challenge on our behalf and on behalf of the police officers who are being asked to impose these laws on the communities they’re sworn to protect.A big thank you to Len Faul and his colleagues at Police On Guard For Thee for meeting with me and letting me ask all these questions, and most of all for the enormous effort they are making on our behalf. I know it’s a volunteer effort, so it means the world to me that they are doing this on all our behalf.
Here is an excerpt from Len's message to police officers and the public:
00:00 - Intro
01:17 - POLICE ON GUARD’S MISSION AND COURT CASE
02:56 - public health during COVID - look at the evidence
04:04 - “it’s not a policing issue” - mandatory laws vs asking nicely
05:16 - the police oath
07:48 - the court case
08:58 - risk of reprisals
09:56 - other examples of police standing for the public against tyrannical government overreach.
10:38 - educating the public and frontline police officers
12:41 - POLICE IN A PRESSURE COOKER: The horrific risks and terrible toll of unconstitutional public health measures
12:41 - the toll on citizens and on police officers
14:57 - legal risks to police officers
16:05 - Crimes Against Humanity - government must be held accountable
16:58 - police officers in danger
18:39 - destroying community support for the police
21:13 - HOW CAN POLICE STOP UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS?
21:13 - Section 1 of the Charter - the government hasn’t met the burden of proof
22:00 - how policing works in Canada
22:07- Police Service Boards
23:30 - good vs bad policing examples during Covid - Churches, Business Closures & Protests
26:58 - WHY DON’T POLICE SIMPLY STOP ENFORCING THIS? - What’s the process
26:58 - civil courts, police associations and police service boards
29:52 - what if an individual police officer refuses to enforce these orders?
31.20 - “They must obey a lawful order, they must not obey an unlawful order”
32:52 - what if an entire department refuses?
36:59 - courts have surrendered to health authorities
36:59 - examples of good vs bad court decisions during COVID
42:54 - KNOW YOUR RIGHTS - petitions, masks, overzealous officers
42:54 - how to make the courts take Police On Guard seriously
44:26 - helping the public help themselves
44:41 - disarming overzealous officers
45:06 - mask laws
46:22 - GUIDE TO GETTING YOUR VOICES HEARD - educating both sides, advice for citizens, businesses, churches, protests and more...
46:52 - how to put pressure on our elected representatives
48:16 - the failure of the media and the importance of alternative media
49:18 - writing letters to your local police department
51:10 - guide to protesting during COVID
53:09 - organizing protests
54:20 - government hypocrisy and overreach
58:22 - civil injunctions, business closures, etc.
1:00:01 - what to do if you get a ticket
1:01:11 - overwhelming the courts - it will never get to a trial
1:01:38 - Malicious Prosecution - message to the public and police officers
1:03:21 - we cannot stop because we must not let this happen again
1:05:36 - HOLDING GOVERNMENT TO ACCOUNT - the public's responsibility to take action
1:06:24 - Forcing the government's hand - lessons from Italy and color revolutions
1:09:12 - Inquiries and trials
1:09:46 - CHECKS AND BALANCES to prevent this ever happening again
1:12:06 - government propaganda, opposition parties, debate, and freedom of speech
1:17:40 - LEN'S MESSAGE TO POLICE OFFICERS AND THE PUBLIC
COPYRIGHT 2021 JULIUS RUECHEL
There is no link to the audio/video of the interview
ReplyDeleteI've added a direct link to the interview on YouTube in case you are still unable to see the embedded video at the top of the article.
DeleteThis can be start of something good if the politicians begin to listen to common sense.If they continue on the path towards a police state then be assured that there are those that will fight back and it won't be peaceful.
ReplyDeleteThank you for this ray of hope from the police who are being honest and really trying to help. One question: When you say "they" won't permit conversation, "they" won't listen to the politicians trying to counteract the draconian measures, "they" aren't listening to the public, who is "they?" Are the Health Officers answerable to Trudeau? Is he calling the shots for the entire country? Is Theresa Tam telling Trudeau what to do and think? Where is this all coming from? Thank you!
ReplyDeleteExcellent question, I wonder if there will be an answer?
DeleteAlthough I can’t speak for Len, when I refer to "they" it’s a general reference to the politicians, health authorities, and media who are driving the narrative and/or hold decision-making authority over our lives.
DeleteAs to the 2nd part of your question, finding the source where all this is coming from is a tangled nightmare. Although the economy (i.e. bailouts) are a federal responsibility, health is technically a provincial jurisdiction. The federal emergency act gave the provinces the right to create emergency rules. Trudeau has the right to intervene if provincial health measures violate our Charter (which he has declined to do so far), but he has no authority to impose health policies onto provinces.
Dr. Tam advises Trudeau, but he doesn't have to follow her advice, although going against her recommendations would be politically risky. But since he's her paymaster and can fire her at will, her advice is likely tailored to what she thinks he wants to hear. That creates a kind of chicken or egg dilemma to identify where bad ideas originate. They may actually be feeding off each other's bad ideas.
Trudeau's government gives recommendations (based on Dr. Tam's advice), but since health is not a federal jurisdiction, the provinces don’t need to follow any of it. The buck stops with the premiers for what happens in each province. That provincial autonomy is why the COVID response varies so much from province to province. Each premier likewise has a health official to advise them, but they’re not bound by their recommendations either. Policy is, after all, supposed to be a political decision, with the option but not the obligation to balance advice from multiple departments (i.e. health, economy, human rights, etc), which are often in conflict with one another.
However, as Doug Ford recently openly admitted, in the current climate no premier would dare go against his chief medical officer because it would be political suicide. Which means no-one's really in charge because the premiers are avoiding accountability by hiding behind their health officials while the health officials avoid accountability by advising whatever they think their political bosses will want to hear.
continued...
continued from above…
DeleteOnce they normalized sweeping aside our Charter rights and freedoms for "safety", they trapped themselves in a self-reinforcing cycle of alarmist recommendations to avoid the accusation of having "put lives at risk". Individual cities are repeating this madness and implementing their own rules independently from the provinces. Premiers have overruled some cities (as is their right) that tried to be more lax than the provincial rules, but so far no premier has dared roll back municipal rules that are more draconian than the provincial rules out of fear of, yet again, being accused of putting lives at risk.
And the media is smack dab in the middle, driving the hysteria to create click-bait and keep eyeballs glued to screens, which motivates them to constantly push health officials and politicians to new heights of hysteria and pounce on any that dare to try to dial down the rhetoric.
In short, it's the perfect self feeding storm. A nightmare where everyone but also no-one is in charge, where everyone is protected from criticism if they dial up the hysteria, but is at risk of accusations of putting lives at risk if they try to dial down the hysteria, where everyone is capable of avoiding accountability by hiding behind someone else, where everyone is in fear of being called reckless or being labeled a conspiracy theorist if they stray from the politically correct narrative, where no-one's willing to speak against what their peers say out of fear of getting mobbed, and, sadly, where there are no shortage of opportunists willing to take advantage of the hysteria to push their own agendas into the mix. Furthermore, the more mistakes that are made, the more strongly they try to squash debate and silence questions from critics to avoid being exposed, held liable, and fired or sued. What a tangled mess!
Thank you very much for your clarification of the absurdity of the situation! Perhaps with Germany and France seemingly backing down from lock downs we may see the light of day shine through some of the BS.
DeleteYou're most welcome! I also have my fingers crossed that Germany's and France's examples set a precedent!
DeleteI think your comments would make a fitting post for FB etc. Would you mind if I used them to create a post? If so would you want credit for it?
DeleteJust wondering, I am not as good a writer as you are.
@Shorty I just published a new article about the tangled web of rule makers, power brokers, and influencers that are propping up this never-ending Hellscape, which expands on my earlier comments about who's in charge.
Delete"Who's in Charge? The Rule Makers, Power Prokers, and Influencers of Lockdown Wonderland" https://www.juliusruechel.com/2021/04/whos-in-charge-rule-makers-power.html