Pushing Back Against Climate Engineering, Canadian Lawsuit Is Filed

geoengineering-watch-12-450x303

Dane Wigington

geoengineeringwatch.org

Legal action has been filed and is now underway in Canada that will greatly assist with the global effort to expose and halt the ongoing climate engineering assault against the planet and the entire web of life. For over a year GeoengineeringWatch.org has been communicating with and forwarding data to Canadian attorneys (in addition to the US team of attorneys we are working with) in the effort to get legal action in motion. This effort has now reached fruition, Geoengineering Watch wishes to express our most sincere gratitude to the attorneys in Canada (and the US attorneys) for their diligent and ongoing work in this most critical battle. Excerpts from the Canadian legal filing are below.

CLAIM

Nature of the Proceeding:

1. This is a mass-tort and environmental Proposed Class Proceeding in respect of the spraying into the atmosphere of toxic substances and particulates by the Defendant that is dangerous to human health, destructive to the environment, and has caused meaningful economic damages.

 

  1. A Declaration that the aerial discharge of coal fly ash and/or other contaminants
    contravenes the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and appurtenant
    Regulations;
  2. A Declaration that the aerial discharge of coal fly ash and/or other contaminants
    contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; 

 c. An interlocutory and a final mandatory order directing that the Defendant comply with the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and appurtenant Regulations;

  1. An interlocutory and a final mandatory order directing that the Defendant comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;
  2. An interlocutory and a final mandatory Order that the Defendant immediately cease and desist the ongoing aerial discharge of coal fly ash and/or other contaminants or substances;

Facts:

  1. On various dates, the Plaintiff observed that certain aircraft discharged trails comprising of white particulate like matter (“Aerial Discharge”), and which Aerial Discharge would persist and often span across the horizon and across the length of the sky.
  2. The Aerial Discharges slowly dissipated, formed a thin, hazy film across the sky, and would obfuscate the sun’s rays.
  3. The Aerial Discharges dissipate across ranges of altitudes, including lower altitudes. Thus, the Aerial Discharges dissipate in the lower altitudes which include the air that the Plaintiff, his family and the potential members of the Class breath.
  4. The Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges are comprised of minute particles that are toxic and/or are easily absorbed into the body and the environment, and are thus dangerous when absorbed into the body or the environment.
  5. The Plaintiff pleads that the Defendant, and/or her agent’s or instrumentalities perform the Aerial Discharges over Canadian air space.
  6. The Plaintiff further pleads that the Defendant knows or ought to know that the Aerial Discharges are dangerous.

Geoengineered skies in Riverside, Ohio (January, 2016). Photo credit: Kelli Shinn Sawyer

Negligence

11. The Plaintiff relies on his pleadings above.

12. The Plaintiff pleads that the Defendant has a duty to not perform actions that are dangerous

to the Plaintiff and proposed Members of the Class. The Plaintiff reiterates his pleadings that the Defendant engaged in the performance of the Aerial Discharges, the Aerial Discharges

are dangerous, and that the Defendant knew or ought to have known that the Aerial

Discharges are dangerous.

  1. The Defendant has breached her duties to the Plaintiff and the proposed Class by engaging in
    the performance of the Aerial Discharges.
  2. The Plaintiff further pleads that the Defendant’s actions have caused meaningful damages to

the Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members. The damages include, inter alia,

  1. serious injury and, in some cases, death;
  2. emotional and psychological trauma;
  3. non-pecuniary damages;
  4. pecuniary damages; and
  5. loss of income.

Nuisance and Trespass

  1. The Plaintiff relies on his pleadings above.
  2. The Plaintiff reiterates his pleadings that the Aerial Discharges are performed by the
    Defendant in Canadian air space.
  3. The Plaintiff also reiterates his pleadings that the Aerial Discharges dissipate into the lower
    atmosphere.
  4. As a result, the Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges permeate and saturate the air
    breathed-in by the Plaintiff and potential Class Members, and thus, cause serious health
    problems and injuries.
  5. Further, the Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges also infect, saturate and damage the
    environment, public property and private property.

    1. Additionally, the Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges interfere and impede with the quiet use and enjoyment of the property of the Plaintiff and the potential Class Members.
    2. The Plaintiff pleads that as a result of the foregoing, the Plaintiff and potential Class Members are entitled to the relief sought in paragraph 4 herein.
    3. The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried in the City of Toronto. 

The efforts toward legal action in the US are also pressing forward as rapidly as possible, we hope to have initiation of the US filing underway in the next few weeks. Support for the non profit “Stop Geoengineering Legal Defense Fund” is critical in order to keep the legal efforts moving forward. Our legal efforts are not affiliated with any other groups, organizations, or websites. Though the forward momentum of the legal efforts are extremely important and valuable to the cause of exposing and halting climate engineering, it is imperative for activists in the field to understand and remember that the front line grassroots awareness raising efforts are still critically important, now more than ever. Exposure of the legal effort needs to be circulated as widely as possible. This will assist with alerting activists and the public to the ongoing court proceedings which will hopefully help with producing mass public attendance at such proceedings. Reaching a critical mass of awareness on the geoengineering issue is the great imperative of our time, all are needed in this effort. Waking the still sleeping masses to the ongoing atmospheric aerosol assault MUST BE our TOP PRIORITY, please, help us in this all important battle to sound the alarm.

The first PDF file contains the full “Statement of Claim” http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents/D%20Pelletier%20-%20Claim.pdf

The second PDF file below contains the “Submission Confirmation” http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents/Initiate%20New%20Proceeding%20-%20Submission%20Confirmation.pdf

May be freely reprinted, so long as the text is unaltered, all hyperlinks are left intact, and credit for the article is prominently given to geoengineeringwatch.org and the article’s author with a hyperlink back to the original story.

Source

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/pushing-back-against-climate-engineering-canadian-lawsuit-filed/

2 thoughts on “Pushing Back Against Climate Engineering, Canadian Lawsuit Is Filed

  1. The Deviance within a Confidant Establishment.

    *What is a law ?
    However it is defined,
    The law is the product of the social conditions at the time it is made.
    The law is not static.
    Just as relationships between people
    Or between people and the government are not fixed permanantly
    So the law changes by responding to the current political and social values of the dominant culture
    As society becomes more complex, so too does the law
    It governs our private relationships through contract, tort, property, succession, trust and family law,
    As well as our public relationship with the state through criminal, constitutional and administrative law.
    Q:-
    ‘The law is not static’ … what does this mean / how does this speak to – responsibility of actions taken –
    A:-
    It is THE means by which the Establishment Deviant can escape the consequences of irresponsibe & self interested acts – this is called Criminal Negligence & Malpractice.
    The transient nature of the law is tailored to assist the Establishment Deviant.
    *What is Duty of Care.
    Duty of care is tort law.
    A duty of care is a legal obligation which is imposed on an individual requiring adherence to a standard of responsible care while performing any act that could foreseeably harm others, it is the first element that must be established to proceed with an action in negligence.
    * We did not know / at the time / the information was not avaliable to us – holds no sway – the plaintiff must take all steps – within reason to discover.
    Good Luck !

  2. I have read news articles from Middle Eastern news outlets, this includes Israeli news. Where the Israeli governmnet regularily, aerial spray Monsanto’s Round Up Weed Killer over Palestinian populated areas. It has obviously never occurred to the Israeli government that wind plays a role in spreading the toxic chemicals, even miles away from the original spray area.
    Either the penny has not dropped to / for, the Israeli government that they all breath the same air – or they could care less for their own population of Jews.
    Go figure the neurological capacity of the Political arena of Israel, which, it seems, equals the neurologocal capability of their counterparts in – for example the political arena’s mentioned in the above article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *