« First « Previous Comments 154 - 193 of 494 Next » Last » Search these comments
Simon Isherwood, who was caught on hot mic criticizing diversity training, wins case after getting fired
A win for free speech.
Simon Isherwood, a rail conductor, won an unfair dismissal case against his employer, the West Midland Trains (WMT), after he was fired in March 2021 for criticizing diversity training on a hot mic.
The diversity training session, attended by about 80 rail workers, was held in January 2020. After the session ended, Isherwood forgot to turn off his microphone and was heard by colleagues complaining about the session to his wife.
“I couldn’t be arsed because I thought, ‘you know what, I’ll just get fucking angry.’ You know what I really wanted to ask?… and I wish I had, do they have black privilege in other countries? So, if you’re in Ghana?” he was heard saying.
Some colleagues complained to the bosses, and Isherwood was suspended pending an investigation. He was dismissed in March after it was determined that his remarks “caused offense, brought the company into disrepute” and breached the company’s “equality, diversity, and inclusion policy, and the code of conduct.”
After his internal appeal was rejected, he decided to sue his employer.
“I’ve lost my job, my income, my reputation, my health is absolutely shot to pieces,” he said at the time.
“I’d worked there for 11-and-a-half years and never had anything but promotion, praise and awards and even now I can’t believe it.
“All I was trying to do was understand the subject better – we had been asked to think of questions so I did exactly what I was asked to do.”
This week, an employment tribunal determined that Isherwood was unfairly dismissed.
“Freedom of expression, including a qualified right to offend when expressing views and beliefs [in this case on social issues], is a fundamental right in a democratic society,” employment judge Stephen Wyeth ruled.
The attorneys general of 22 states have filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration over a new rule that seeks to block federal meal funding from schools that don’t follow the administration’s gender identity policies.
Health Care Workers Settle COVID Shot Mandate for $10.3 Million
CHICAGO, IL – Today, Liberty Counsel settled the nation’s first classwide lawsuit for health care workers over a COVID shot mandate, for more than $10.3 million. The class action settlement against NorthShore University HealthSystem is on behalf of more than 500 current and former health care workers who were unlawfully discriminated against and denied religious exemptions from the COVID shot mandate. The agreed upon settlement was filed today in the federal Northern District Court of Illinois.
As a result of the settlement, NorthShore will pay $10,337,500 to compensate these health care employees who were victims of religious discrimination, and who were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells.
This is a historic, first-of-its-kind class action settlement against a private employer who unlawfully denied hundreds of religious exemption requests to COVID-19 shots.
The settlement must be approved by the federal District Court. Employees of NorthShore who were denied religious exemptions will receive notice of the settlement, and will have an opportunity to comment, object, request to opt out, or submit a claim form for payment out of the settlement fund, all in accordance with deadlines that will be set by the court.
As part of the settlement agreement, NorthShore will also change its unlawful “no religious accommodations” policy to make it consistent with the law, and to provide religious accommodations in every position across its numerous facilities. No position in any NorthShore facility will be considered off limits to unvaccinated employees with approved religious exemptions.
https://viralimmunologist.substack.com/p/health-care-workers-settle-covid
No position in any NorthShore facility will be considered off limits to unvaccinated employees with approved religious exemptions.
That’s good. It rules out remote reassignment which as I’ve heard appears to be a common “accommodation.”
But will there be additional testing and masking requirements for “exempt” unvaccinated?
Unvaccinated Canadian firefighter gets his job back after department faces legal pressure
'To accept this medical procedure, he said, would violate his conscience and religious convictions.'
CELISTA, British Columbia (LifeSiteNews) – After pressure from a constitutional legal group, a Canadian firefighter who lost his job for refusing COVID vaccines was reinstated to his position.
According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), volunteer firefighter Craig Nygard of the Columbia Shuswap Regional District (CSRD) in British Columbia was able to get his job back after it sent a legal warning letter to the fire department in April.
The JCCF demanded that “Mr. Nygard be accommodated in his request for a religious exemption from CSRD’s mandatory Covid vaccine policy.” ...
No less than 30 firefighters from the CSRD lost their jobs for refusing to comply with a workplace COVID vaccine mandate despite the fire department experiencing worker shortages.
PULLMAN, Wash. (AP) — Former Washington State football coach Nick Rolovich has filed a claim against the university seeking $25 million for wrongful termination after he was fired last year for refusing to get vaccinated against COVID-19.
The case centers around workers at NorthShore University HealthSystem, who filed a lawsuit in October 2021 claiming their employer illegally refused to grant any religious exemptions to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
$25 million seems way too low for such an egregious violation of basic human rights.
https://apnews.com/article/covid-college-football-health-sports-washington-state-cougars-3c1da4b1ca054f459ff87cd81fec2fbb
PULLMAN, Wash. (AP) — Former Washington State football coach Nick Rolovich has filed a claim against the university seeking $25 million for wrongful termination after he was fired last year for refusing to get vaccinated against COVID-19.
$25 million seems way too low for such an egregious violation of basic human rights.
Alex Berenson Sues the Biden Administration for 1A Infringement
A COVID truth-teller has already prevailed against Twitter, and he has the goods on Team Biden.
Alex Berenson is pale, sweaty, and baggy-eyed, and he looks more like a computer science professor than a crusader for First Amendment rights. And yet here he is, suing the pants off the censors at Twitter and in the Biden White House.
We should be rooting like hell for him.
Berenson is back on Twitter after having been “permanently” banned from the platform for nearly a year because, Twitter claimed, he was spreading “misinformation” about COVID-19. Last week, the former New York Times reporter settled his lawsuit against the hard-left social media company, which admitted its mistake and restored his account.
What sort of “misinformation” was Berenson accused of spreading? What was it that got him the lifetime ban? Oh, irrefutable, evidence-based “misinformation” like this, which he tweeted last August:
It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it — at best — as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.
Lawsuit filed: RW Malone vs. WP Company, LLC
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/lawsuit-filed-rw-malone-vs-wp-company
Lawsuit filed: RW Malone vs. WP Company, LLC
I hope Malone gets every penny the WaPo has.
People do read and believe what is published in WAPO. I know several that do.
How old are they?
richwicks says
How old are they?
One just turned 50. Also believes CNN. One elderly, upper 70's. The other, husband and wife probably early '50's, I guess. This is Maryland, BTW, where there are many DC tit suckers.
Talk to some people from the younger generations.
When I began pointing out how many lies were propagated by the MSM to them, they asked what instead they should listern too. So there you have it, there is a need for an interpreter and teller of reality in a significant part of the population.
Breaking: Researcher appointed by the Israeli MOH to investigate COVID-19 vaccine side effects warned the ministry it could be open to lawsuits for encouraging the public to get vaccinated while claiming that side effects are mild and transient
| 10911 צפיות
In a leaked recording of a Zoom discussion with Israeli Ministry of Health (IMOH) officials, revealed by GB News on Saturday, a researcher hired by the ministry to conduct a study on the side effects of the vaccine can be heard explaining to ministry officials that the findings establish a causal relationship and warning them that they could be exposed to lawsuits. ...
Serious side effects: not rare, not transient
The research team repeatedly stressed during the discussion that their findings indicate that, contrary to what has been thought and claimed so far, in many cases, serious adverse events are long-lasting. An important example is menstrual irregularities – an adverse event on which mountains of reports have accumulated since the launch of the vaccination rollout in December 2020. In one of the slides presented by the researchers in the recorded zoom discussion, the researchers wrote: "Studies carried out on the above mentioned subject noted short-term abnormalities (up to a few days) in the menstrual cycle. However, over 90% of the reports detailing the characteristics of the duration of this adverse event indicate long-term changes (emphasis in the original. Y.S). Over 60% indicate duration of over 3 months". ...
As can be seen from the above slide, the findings reveal that various neurological side effects are likewise not transient but long-lasting. In fact, according to the researchers, most of the reports that referred to their duration state that they lasted for over three months, and a third stated that they lasted for over a year. Similarly, other systemic side effects, such as musculoskeletal injuries, GI problems and kidney and urinary adverse events, are not short and transient.
Pfizer cannot use the government as a shield from liability for making false claims about its COVID-19 vaccine, lawyers for a whistleblower argued in response to Pfizer’s motion to dismiss a False Claims Act lawsuit. ...
“Respondents claim fraudulent certifications, false statements, doctored data, contaminated clinical trials, and firing of whistleblowers can be ignored based on the theory that they contracted their way around the fraud,” lawyers for Brook Jackson, who worked as regional director at one of the clinical trials used to develop the Pfizer vaccine, wrote in their Aug. 22 response.
“A drug company cannot induce the taxpayers to pay billions of dollars for a product,” they countered, “that honest data would show poses more risks than benefits, and that ignores the actual contract and the law itself.”
Jackson’s lawsuit alleges that Pfizer and two of its subcontractors violated the False Claims Act by providing bogus clinical trial results to garner the FDA approval of its COVID-19 vaccine.
Under federal law, individuals can sue on behalf of the government and win treble damages if they can prove an individual or company deliberately lied to the government.
One of Jackson’s attorneys, Warner Mendenhall, told The Epoch Times that the payout could be as much as $3.3 trillion.
“It would be enough to bankrupt Pfizer,” Mendenhall said.
Mendenhall, whose law firm has won multimillion-dollar False Claims Act cases, based his estimates on the more than $2 billion the U.S. government has paid Pfizer for more than 100 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine. ...
While she is seeking compensation for her termination as part of her actions against Pfizer and the other companies, Jackson said she plans to donate any money she receives under her legal action against the companies to those injured by the vaccine.
“As far as I’m concerned, it’s blood money,” she said. “The world should be disgusted by what went on here with the shameful actions behind this dangerous vaccine.”
Bill Gates Hit with Indian High Court Notice over Vaccine Death
Billionaire Bill Gates has been issued with a notice from the Bombay High Court over a case that alleges the Microsoft co-founder is responsible for deaths related to COVID-19 vaccines.
A petition was filed in the court by a father who said the vaccine killed his daughter, the Hindustan Times reported.
In relation to the case, the High Court also sent a notice to the Indian government (Maharashtra and Union government) and the biopharmaceuticals company Serum Institute of India (SII).
The petitioner, Dilip Lunawat, is seeking Rs 1,000 crore ($125,451,200) compensation after his daughter, Dr. Snehal Lunawat, died after receiving the Covishield vaccine.
Mr. Lunawat blames the government, Bill Gates, and others responsible for spreading misleading information about the vaccine’s safety.
Gates is accused of contributing to the government’s mandates that forced medical professionals to get vaccinated. ...
She was vaccinated with Covishield, which is developed by the SII.
Days later, she suffered severe headaches and vomiting and was rushed to a hospital.
Doctors found she was bleeding in her brain, the petition said.
Lunwat says his daughter died as a result of side effects from the vaccine on March 1. ...
The petitioner has also sought a response from Gates, whose organization – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – had partnered with the SII to accelerate the process of manufacturing to deliver 100 million doses of the vaccine.
He also sought a response from the Union government, Maharashtra government, and the Drug Controller General of India.
Lunwat says he is seeking justice for his daughter and “many more people who are likely to be murdered” due to similar cases of adverse effects, according to the petition.
A father and parental rights advocate won a major lawsuit against Maine Regional School Unit (RSU) after he was banned from the school district’s facilities for reading an obscene book that was in the school district’s own library.
After Shawn McBreairty, a father of two spoke out at his daughter’s own high school over the introduction of obscene books, parents from around the state asked him to speak up on behalf of their children.
After reading an obscene book in RSU’s libraries that described detailed sex teens between two underaged boys, the district banned him for obscenity.
McBreairty sued the school district for violating his first amendment rights and won $40,000.
Parents around the country have been pushing back against obscene books that push radical gender ideology and critical race theory on to children.
Vaccine damage to health. Compensation for a 16 year old: 750 euros per month for 15 years
September 16, 2022
T., aged 16, will be compensated by the state for the permanent damage of an autoimmune thrombocythemia caused by a dose of the anti Covid vaccine. And he will be entitled to 750 euros per month for 15 years.
September 20, 2022
Fact-checkers complain they’re constantly hit with lawsuits
Online fact checkers have great authority over what speech gets suppressed on mainstream social media platforms and a fact-check of a post on Facebook can result in that post being suppressed by as much as 95%.
Yet, despite their great power over what people can say, fact checkers are also increasingly frustrated at calls for more transparency about the way they operate and say they are being bombarded with freedom of information act (FOIA) requests and lawsuits. ...
Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against California’s Secretary of State for making YouTube censor a video on election integrity posted weeks before the November 2020 election.
On September 22, 2020, Judicial Watch posted a video on election integrity on YouTube, titled: “**ELECTION INTEGRITY CRISIS** Dirty Voter Rolls, Ballot Harvesting & Mail-in-Voting Risks!” In the 26-minute video, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton discussed election topics like ballot harvesting, changes in states’ election procedures, vote-by-mail processes, and failures by states to update voter rolls.
The lawsuit alleges that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity (OEC), overseen by California’s State Secretary Shirley Weber, contacted Google to have the video removed. The suit accuses Weber and her office of violating Judicial Watch’s First Amendment and other rights.
We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.
According to records, on September 24, 2020, OEC’s social media coordinator Akilah Jones sent an email to Google to report the video.
“I am reporting the following video because it misleads community members about elections or other civic processes and misrepresents the safety and security of mail-in ballots. Thank you for your time and attention on this matter,” Jones wrote in the email.
A Google/YouTube representative replied to Jones on September 25, saying they would look into it. Later that day, the video was removed. Two days later, the Google/YouTube representative confirmed to Jones that the video had been removed for violating the platform’s policies.
According to the lawsuit, Weber and the OEC violated Judicial Watch’s First and Fourteenth Amendments, and civil rights established in the state of California’s constitution.
“Smoking gun documents show California government officials, who were being advised by the Biden campaign PR operation, caused YouTube to censor a key Judicial Watch video just before the 2020 election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This egregious government censorship and election interference violated Judicial Watch’s civil rights, and our lawsuit seeks to stop and expose the growing corruption of leftist government officials colluding with Big Tech allies to attack the free speech rights of Americans.”
« First « Previous Comments 154 - 193 of 494 Next » Last » Search these comments
Corporations in particular are afraid of lawsuits because they have a lot of money. Sue them first.
But it's also useful to sue the government when they are violating our rights.
A nice suit started by https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/ :