What is Truth worth? - Ongoing deceptions in Canada

Today’s article starts with a question from the previous article.

Unfortunately my experiences this year in Canada’s “Freedom Movement” has proven that for many people truth is worth less than, money, pride or even prejudice.

But first lets rewind a couple of years.

One of the biggest surprises for me in the Freedom movement was being on an awake Christian doctors chat and hearing a female doctor complain about how she gave a series of vaccines to a child, but didn’t say anything because the parents looked “woke”. Specifically, the mother had purple hair. She posted about how she was afraid she’d get in trouble if she said anything. My comment that she should have simply examined the child, and asked the parents to look into the long term effects before making a final decision was unwelcome. She said that she had a mortgage to pay and couldn’t afford to get in trouble.

When I pointed out the morality of putting one’s mortgage above someone else’s child, I was met with a litany of faith based excuses. While I stated that it is one thing to do harm without knowing and expect forgiveness - aka innocence (“in” = without + “nocence”= perception), knowingly doing harm is an entirely different matter. (For more about the history of childhood vaccines and harm see the footnotes) Not long after calling out immorality, I was kicked out of the Christian doctors chat. The shallowness to forgive oneself harming a child because of the inconvenience of being reported to the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons was stunning.1

• Was the blood sacrifice of a man over 2000 years ago meant for mortgages?

• Is malevolence deserving of “forgiveness”?

Unfortunately this is just one example of many immoral doctors I’ve encountered in the “freedom” movement. Another example of doctorly cowardice continuing the sacrifice of children to the mRNA experiment is here:

Whether it is greed or fear that causes doctors to harm others, the end result reflects on the values that they have and particularly how faith affects their decisions in life.

A number of times throughout this substack I embed topics of morality within other subjects, because I see it as an integral principle of reason. But sometimes I write dedicated articles such as “The Difference between Evil and Good”2 as standalone pieces to read before articles like this one. The importance is that it prepares the mind for the bigger moral questions that can be easily overlooked.

Though I’ve taken pains to write articles illustrating the principles of Kant, but in an easier to comprehend format with real life examples3, it still irks me how little the Canadian freedom movement has developed morally. The most recent failure being the outdoor biological experimentation site dubiously called an ostrich farm. The right of neighbors not to be harmed from outdoor biologic experimentation went ignored by the “freedom” movement, which is ironic given that the entire movement mobilized to resist the largest outdoor biological experiment in history. More about the ostriches in the footnotes.

The money pilfered into legal coffers by the ostrich movement is perhaps the most immoral act of the Canadian freedom movement to date. However, the beginnings of this sabotage using legal “fundraisers” started years before.

In culture today, exaggerating and “stretching” the truth is so common that it is often thought of as human nature. Telling “tall” tales is often thought of as an innocent white lie. But consider if a “white” lie, opens the door for harmful lies to follow. Does giving a pass to the white lie pave the path to great wrongs?

The issue of “Where is the harm?” I discussed in my previous article about ignorance.

https://danielnagase.substack.com/i/172978710/not-knowing-wasnt-the-sin-it-was-the-ignorance

One way to examine this question is to look at a past “White Lie” to see what effect it has on today. Is the harm of “White Lies” subversive in that the effects lay in the future?

Take for example the “We’re Winning”, narrative that was pushed heavily through Freedom movement social media 2 years ago. Was this exaggerated “feel good” narrative behind the complacency and the losses of 2024 and 2025?4

Over 2 years ago, the Canadian alternative media was heavily invested in a victory narrative. This may have caused the formerly popular British Columbia group named “BC Rising” to cut off a zoom call announcement for a Magna Carta petition against the August 23, 2023 decision of the BC Supreme Court. This case precedent granted judges and magistrates absolute immunity from liability. The organizers of BC Rising unashamedly prioritized talking about a boat ride with Tamara Leech and former politician Brian Peckford over a rally about the most dangerous Supreme Court precedent in Canadian history5 . The “Freedom Group” BC Rising thought it was more important to talk about sitting on a small watercraft with a former premier.

Did the Pride in a “We’re winning” narrative create ignorance?

While my article from September 16th, 2025, was about the prejudice of race, today’s article discusses the prejudice of status.

In 2022, a former surgeon and friend in Vancouver Canada started fundraising for a legal challenge in the Supreme Court of BC against the Covid Vaccine mandates. The lawyer who was plying for the money was Peter A. Gall QC (Queen’s Counsel). He later change his title to KC (King’s Counsel) after Queen Elizabeth died. Despite a premature retirement from Vancouver General Hospital to avoid the covid vaccine, Dr. Hsiang gave hundreds of thousands of his own money for the case.

The early version of the legal proceeding in 2022 only petitioned for a suspension of vaccine mandates, a declaration they were unreasonable, and court costs with whatever extras the judge felt like giving at his discretion. For a vaccine mandate that interrupted countless lives, caused innumerable side effects and deaths, this seemed like a very weak plea. Especially in light of the 90+ pages of evidence to support the petition that included detailed exhibits on the ineffectiveness of masking and vaccines in preventing transmission, how could the demands be so weak?

I warned as many as who would listen that the petition would be meaningless unless it asked for restitution for those harmed by the mandates. As it was written a judge could simply decide to give people $10 as compensation to people who lost a house after getting fired. That would be in the event of a “win”. Restitution would mean compensation for what was lost, not more. However, a loss of such a weakly fought case would be even worse.

In the event of a loss, the legal principle of double jeopardy could prevent any similar case from being tried again against the government. This petition, because of the exhaustive evidence of the ineffectiveness of masks and vaccines, could prevent the most useful evidence against vaccine mandates from being used again.

Even with a “Win”, subsequent cases with stronger claims of damages against the government could be denied on the basis that the case had already been heard. This effectively preempts any future case from bringing for meaningful restitution to people who lost their homes and livelihoods.

It would have taken the addition of only 1 sentence to amend the mid 2022 filing against legal sabotage. For “orders sought” in the judicial review:

• “Restitution for all those who lost due to vaccination mandates.”

In the end, Dr. Hsiang refused my advice to instruct his King’s Counsel lawyer to make the 1 sentence amendment. Despite costing hundreds of thousands in lawyer’s fees, the legal defect in writing being visible in plain sight, did not sway his trust in Peter Gall KC. After all, what qualification does a lowly Emergency Room doctor have in the “Legal” world compared to a “King’s Counsel”, the highest title for a Canadian lawyer?

The last I heard from my doctor friend, he was trying to raise $300,000 so that the lawyer Peter Gall could “finish the case”. I don’t know how much was raised from the freedom movement and how much he ended up paying out of his own pocket, but the amendments that followed made the final version of the petition even weaker than the initial filings. The final version that went to judicial review gave generous room for the government to excuse its violations of human rights, namely the right to life, liberty and security of person.

The case was lost in May of 2024, and it was quickly used as a precedent to support the government’s position against other lawsuits. The case “fought” by Peter Gall KC was more than just a loss for the plaintiffs. It was a loss for everyone. Despite the warning signs on paper and in clear writing, the suit that cost hundreds of thousands became a legal sabotage against the freedom movement. The prejudice of trust in the high legal title of “King’s Counsel” blinded my surgeon friend and others to the obvious. For sabotage apparent on the very first pages of the suit, to be carried out without corrective action from very literate plaintiffs was a preventable tragedy.

I, myself, am no stranger to how costly blind faith in lawyers can be. Back in 2014/2015/2016, I burned over $200,000 trying to defend the integrity of medicine in British Columbia from VIP patients with no acute illness causing life threatening delays in the care of emergency patients.

• My case was a situation in South Okanagan General Hospital where I tried to institute a hospital policy about VIP patients being seen in order of severity in the Emergency Department. This was following an incident where a stable VIP patient caused a life threatening delay in the care of a heart attack patient..

• The Chief of the Hospital, Dr. Peter Entwistle, retaliated against my attempt to pass a hospital policy that unstable ER patients should take precedence over stable VIP patients, by staging a disciplinary action based on his own accusations as Chief of Staff. He then investigated his own allegations and came to the conclusion he was right.

• Dr. Peter Entwistle along with senior executives at Interior Health escalated by slandering me to other health authorities in BC, calling me amongst other things and “April Fool’s Joke” - never mentioning that the origin of the matter was a VIP patient that nearly killed another ER patient. (More about the implications of this case in the footnotes6 )

• Naively believing in justice, I brought up a lawsuit in BC Supreme Court to address the root issue of VIP patients causing harm and the administrative defamation that followed my attempts to correct it. I filed a suit against Interior Health Executives using the lawyer J.H. Schenk. Morality in the court system was proven to be an illusion when it closed ranks and sided with hospital administration.

  • The BC Supreme court decided that slander and defamation by hospital administrators was “Protected” speech and could not be used as a cause for legal action because it was a part of the “Medical Record”.

  • Even though there was no patient file associated with the defamation and slander, the BC supreme court justice The Honourable Mr. Justice G.C. Weatherill decided that everything hospital administrators did was a “medical record”.

  • Per section 51 of the BC Healthcare Act, the medical records showing a life threatening delay in care from the VIP patient sidelining the care of ER patients was not admissible in court as they were “Protected Speech”

• I appealed G.C. Weatherill’s decision to the BC court of appeals in 2015/2016 using the same lawyer Johannes Schenk. I was disappointed yet again.

  • The Honourable Madam Justice Garson, The Honourable Madam Justice Stromberg-Stein, The Honourable Mr. Justice Fitch all decided that there was no cause to sue the hospital administrators as they were in their right to defame and slander as a part of the “medical record”.

Take the example of the outdoor ostrich biolab in BC. Farmers who planned to slaughter their flock for meat tried to enhance their earnings with biological experimentation. Animals that were poorly kept in subzero temperatures despite being an African bird species died in the winter of 2024/2025. So many dead were seen by a neighbor that federal authorities were called.

The Canadian “Freedom” movement mobilized to save the lives of birds that were intended to be slaughtered for meat. Untold amounts of money were raised and given to ostrich “farmers” turned biotech entrepreneurs who then paid significant sums of money to lawyers.

The lawyers in turn give between 30 and 45% of their “earnings” off the “Freedom” movement to the government of Canada through taxes.

• Should people who ignore rights of their neighbors to not be contaminated by outdoor biological experiments be supported?

• Do people who abuse their test animals hold any moral high ground?

https://rumble.com/v6zic2g-bc-ostrich-problem.html?e9s=src_v1_upp_a

• Do those who ignore the most significant legal case in Canada have what it takes to “win” against an immoral government?

• Do people who grant themselves forgiveness; feel they did the right thing by following those with high title; or think it is “right” to live by prejudices of race; do they deserve to win?

  • Are people even smart enough to win if they ignore deceptions written in plain sight - whether out of prejudice, pride or entitlement?

    • See footnotes about prejudices of race within the “freedom” movement.

If an AI can better understand prejudice than most people in the freedom movement, what does that say about humanity as a whole?

• What “Future” do we “deserve” and why?

  • What have we done to earn a bright future?

In the new year I hope to cover brighter topics such as the secrets of language, how they are made and how both people and civilizations are built on them.

Until then:

3

The Difference Between Negligence and Homicide

·

May 23, 2023

When I testified at Canada’s National Citizen’s Inquiry I spoke about homicide in the hospital. In the 1/2 hour I was scheduled to speak I did not have the time to explain why I chose homicide versus the more common claim of malpractice or negligence.