Shaun Newman Podcast - #217 - Corporal Daniel Bulford

Episode Date: November 8, 2021

He has been an officer with the RCMP for 15 years and for the last 8 years on the Emergency Response Team where his primary duties were supporting the protection of the Prime Minister & other internationally protected persons.  Let me know what you think Text me 587-217-8500 Like the podcast? Support here: https://www.patreon.com/ShaunNewmanPodcast

Welcome to the podcast, folks. Happy Monday. Hope you had a great weekend myself. I got to do a little intro to hockey with my daughter, a little U7 with my son, got to see him score his first call, give the fist pump that touched the heavens, so to speak. He was pretty excited. I think if everybody, you know, listening and across Canada got to go on Sunday mornings and watch some U7 hockey, or for that matter, intro to hockey, I think a lot of our problems would be solved immediately. I don't know how you can't go to things like that, see the kids playing, and just smile. But that might just be me. Let's get on to our episode sponsors for today.

We've got a great one coming up. Carly Closs and the team over at Windsor Plywood, builders of the podcast, studio table for everything. Wood, these are the guys. I see they got their new, I'm a little late to the game here. I obviously haven't been doing my creep-in, creeping, as much as I should have been. I hopped on Instagram, and I see they got their brand-new website up. So if you're wanting to check out some of the wood products they're dealing with, oh, heck, all the products they got, go to Windsorplywood, lloydminster.ca.

So that's all one-one. Windsor plywoodloidminster.com. You can check them out online, whether we're talking mantles, decks, windows, doors, sheds. These are the guys. I mean, they got some just gorgeous slabs of wood. That's what the table is, right? I talk about the podcast studio table all the time. She is a piece of work, and that's coming from the team over at Windsor Plywood.

So give me a call 780 875-9663, or once again, hop on their website, Windsor, Plywood, Lloydminster.com, C.A. Mortgage broker, Jill Fisher, now obviously your name says it all. She probably serves the areas of Lloydminster, Bonneville, Cold Lake, for a million, and she's looking forward to working with you for all your mortgage needs. You know, whether you're buying a house for the first time or maybe you're looking to renew, heck maybe you just want to see what the rates are maybe you're locked in for a bit and you're and you're looking at what maybe you can do i would just say go to jfisher dot caa the world is just in a volatile time things are constantly changing all the time and uh you got to stay on top of

uh things if you're not locked in uh like your mortgage rate so give her a call 780 872 2914 or once again go to jfisher dot cae clay smiling the team over profit river uh they got the showroom retail space flooring has been installed and they'll be almost ready to go in there they got phase one of their custom walnut cabin tree complete and ready to ship to us that was the last update i got so i'm going to give the boys a little bit of hard time here because i'm curious what's going on inside there i joked when i was on my my way home last week they got this giant gate being built uh off the one side it's it's going to be a fortress and that's that's pretty cool to watch uh be built Now, of course, Profit River specializes in porting firearms from the United States of America,

and they do everything for you. You know, I always think any time you're doing something as intensive as that, you know, the paperwork that's got to be going on, so that must be just like my hurt your brain. Well, they take care of all of it, right? So just go to Profitriver.com. They'll get you squared away today, get you what you need from there all the way to your house. They are the major retailer of firearms, optics, and accessories, all of Canada.

That is profitriver.com. Trophy Gallery, downtown Lloyd Minster is Canada supplier for glass and crystal awards. I think with sports specifically here, hockey back underway, and all the kids out playing, you know, we got them registered into tournaments. So, you know, trophies, medals, et cetera,

are going to be starting to fly all around again. And if you're starting up a tournament, I suggest hopping in to Lloyd Minster or even going on their website, They do ship Canadawide. That's trophygallery.ca. You can see what they're cooking with, so to speak. I mean, I just always bring it back to the S&P mugs that Clint did up.

They are fantastic. I've been handing a few of them out because they are sharp, and he carries that level of detail across all the products he makes. And if you're into a bunch of different things, all you've got to do is go to his website, trophygallery.ca. He's got all sizes, all shapes, all price ranges. all the way from medals and trophies through to, you know, WWE Championship belts.

That's just kind of the variation that he's got sitting there. So head on over and check them out. Jen Gilbert and the team for over 45 years since 1976, the dedicated realtors of Coldwell Bankers, Cityside Realty have served Lloyd Minster in the surrounding area. They offer Star Power providing their clients with seven-day-a-week access. They know big-life decisions are not made during office hours. True words have never been spoken.

Coldwell Bankers, cityside realty for everything real estate 24 hours a day seven days a week 780 875 3343 if you're looking for outdoor signage the team over at read and write is who i go to they always make the smp look sharp whether we're talking frosted windows for maybe your office uh or a wall quote the smp logo that sticks on the wall all done by the team over at reading right all you got to do is give me a call 306 8255 5 triple one gartner management is a lloydminster base company specialized in all of rental properties to help meet your needs, whether you're looking for a small office or a 6,000 square foot commercial space, give Wade Gartner a call 7808, 808, 5025.

And if you're heading into any of these businesses, make sure you let them know. You heard about him from the podcast, right? Now let's get on that T-Barr 1, Tale of the Tape. He's been an officer with the RCMP for 15 years, six and a half of which have been spent up in the Yukon. Since 2013, he's been in Ottawa, where he spent the last eight years on the emergency response team where his primary duties were supporting the protection of the prime minister and other internationally protected persons. I'm talking about Corporal Dan Bulford. So buckle up. Here we go. This is Corporal

Daniel Bulford and this is the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the Sean Newman podcast today. I'm joined by Corporal Daniel Bulford. So first off, sir, thanks for hopping on. Thank you for having me. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today. Yeah, it's, um, well, As I was just saying before we started, I, you know, I'm long since the dawn cherries of the world. It's been an interesting little go here. And if I thought I was going to ever sit down with a RCMP officer with some of your accolades, I don't know if I would have believed it back then. So I do appreciate you giving me some of your precious time this morning.

Then before we get really rolling into this, maybe you could give some background on yourself, Dan, so people can get a feel for who you are. and maybe some of your, well, just your background. Kate, well, I was born in Saskatchewan. When I was young, we moved to Alberta, and that's where I spent the majority of my childhood and young adult years. I joined the RCMP in August 2006, graduated from Depot Training Academy in Regina, January 2007,

was posted to Whitehorse Yukon, worked there for four years. Then I was posted to Mayo, Yukon, which is about four hours north of Whitehorse. I was there for two and a half years. And then I transferred to Ottawa in July 2013. And that's where I have been since as a member of the emergency response team. So I know in listening to previous interviews of you, you come from a family background of of like you're an RCMP family. I mean, your father was an RCMP officer.

You have siblings. I guess I just, I'm curious. Like, what got you to the point where you're willing to, you know, step out? I've heard this, me and my brothers, I have three older brothers. We've argued about this lots. And one of the things that's really hard to define is like, where's your line? And when that line's crossed, what are your actions? And when I look at people like yourself, and I mentioned before, you know, I've had Eric Payne on here.

I see very interesting similarities between the two of you in that you're not old guys. You're relatively young, so to speak. And you're at like really high profile jobs in your professions, meaning you got lots to lose. So where in the story do you finally go, you know what? It's time to, there's the line and it's been crossed and it's time to start speaking. Well, I can, I'll elaborate on the family tradition a little bit first, just to give a bit of context to that. My father was in the Mounted Police for roughly 38 years. My oldest sister works at a detachment in Alberta.

my two older brothers were both Mounties as well. Similar service to me. Actually, my one older brother, my oldest brother and I were in training together at Deppel. He was one class removed from me. So we were there for 22 out of the 24 weeks together. And then our middle brother has, I'd say roughly two, two and a half years more service than I do. He's still an active serving member in British Columbia. And my oldest brother just recently left the RCMP.

So there's a real tradition of the Mounties in our family. When I was younger, I was kind of on the cusp of whether I was going to join the military or join the RCMP. And for family and relationship reasons, I chose the RCMP. You know, things have changed dramatically for me over the course of my career and how I view the organization. You know, like when I was graduating from training and I got my red surge and my dad got to present me with my badge, that was a real moment of pride for me. And my actually, my older brother was there as well. And so they jointly presented it to me.

And then my oldest brother graduated the week following. This definitely was not part of my life plan. I had made myself a very good life. I worked hard. I think anyone in my past that has been a co-worker of mine, regardless of how they feel about me right now based on what I'm doing, I think they would all agree that I have been, competent and hardworking and a dedicated member of the mounted police.

I've been paying attention to changes that have been happening in our society. Much of it being driven by our current government's ideology for a number of years. I've been paying attention to infringements on people's freedoms, most notably beginning a few years ago with freedom of speech and some legislation around compelled speech in Ontario. Actually, that may have been federal, but I know it was big news in Ontario because there were other academic public intellectuals that...

Yeah, you're speaking about Jordan Peterson from back to that. That's exactly right. Yeah, that's right. So Jordan Peterson was one of the first people that I noticed. Yeah, and if anyone wants... against this. Yeah, sorry, if anybody wants to see what, what you're talking about or what we're referencing, you just go to YouTube and Jordan Peterson, U of T, you know, compelled speech. And you can, you can find a ton there about what he was talking about right around, I don't know,

2015, 2016, somewhere in that time frame. That's right. Yeah. And I mean, since then, he's become a global sensation, right, with books and podcasts and touring the world. delivering lectures. So thankfully for him, he landed on his feet despite being pushed out of his long-time profession for his willingness to speak out against what he believed was wrong and an overreach by the government. Now, and he's not alone in that. I've also been following other people such as Dr. Brett Weinstein and his wife,

Dr. Heather Haying from the Dark Horse podcast, they faced a very simple, similar issue to him to Jordan Peterson down in Evergreen College, which again, if people Google that, they can find out details surrounding that controversy. And I found that people like that are often labeled with some pretty horrific names in an attempt to silence them or to get them to back off and just go away. So when you see people behave courageously like that, despite the fact that they're willing to lose so much, I've been paying attention to people like that, and I've been intrigued by them.

And when you listen to them, if you actually listen to them, they do not give the perspective at all that they are the type of person that their critics claim them to be. They're very reasonable. They're very detailed, very articulate, and their explanations for their actions

and why they believe what they believe seem very well founded in scientific literature and in his applying their moral code, so to speak, based on their knowledge of history and major events in history. So all of that to say, with this specific, situation that's going on right now. I've been a weight to the fact that this government ideology has been continuously overreaching into the rights of the individual. And for me, I don't think that there is a boundary that would be more inappropriate, inappropriate to cross than that of bodily autonomy.

And I say that because there's already so much legislation and even historic traditional belief in our society that the rights of the individual is a paramount pillar of our society in the West. And I think I agree with people like Jordan Peterson that that's why our quality of life to date. has been so far superior to that of other parts in the world where they have it they have experimented with other types of political and economic systems which have been devastating to those nations and restrictions of freedom and death even in extreme circumstances if you're thinking to historical context like the soviet union and And so this has been building over time. I continued doing my job to the best of my abilities, admittedly because it had not yet directly impacted me.

I was left alone for the most part to do my job. And as long as I performed my job well, I was left alone. I could have my own belief system. as long as I performed, my job was secure. But now that this is in my own backyard, I see what other protesters have seen already. I've often thought to myself, you know, what are they hoping to accomplish?

And now I feel like I have a little bit more perspective on that. And my hope is that if enough people like myself stand up and say no, you can't do this, this is unlawful, that the government will realize that they can't continue overreaching into the private lives of citizens. And they only can because we allow them to do it. Now, coming back to your question about why,

what led me to, what was my final line, line in the sand, as I've mentioned in previous interviews, it's this, this bodily autonomy. And mostly because I have done a significant amount of my own personal investigation into the evidence that would support these public health policy decisions. And overwhelmingly, I have come across consistent themes. if between the official narrative, like being what the government and the mainstream media is constantly pumping to the public, creating this massive fear state, and what would be considered the counter narrative. So the medical, scientific community that is being censored and suppressed, who is offering an alternative system of. response to the COVID-19 situation.

I know you've had many experts on that have discussed the data as to the lack of evidence in support of the public health measures. And I'll just briefly mention the three themes that I have overwhelmingly noticed every time I've tried to look for supporting evidence. for what we're doing right now. Like, specifically the vaccine mandate is that the general vague statements

that they are safe and effective, benefits outweigh the risk, it's the best tool to get through this. So they make these statements. You have to do it to protect yourself and others. And that's a big one. I think that's a big one that has probably garnered,

the most compliance is that you have to do it to protect others. But when I've gone looking for information that would support those claims, it's very minimal. It is available that is of high quality and that it's easily accessible. I've looked hard. I wanted to believe that these were safe and effective because the majority of my family and friends and loved ones have taken it. and it would make life much simpler for all of us if that was if that if that if that was the easy button and we could all move on but i think it's becoming increasingly clear that they're not completely safe they're not even they're not nearly as effective as they were originally claimed to be especially over any length of time more than a few months

and if you look at countries that are ahead of us in the vaccination rollout, that's pretty clear. Well, you're starting to see it, Dan, you're starting to see it here in Canada now, right? Like, you're starting to see more and more, I don't know, infections of the vaccinated here in Canada. I think we're up to, I think, well, I tell you what, I'll pull up the exact number for you. How's that? I believe it's 620 people in all of Canada have been fully vaccinated and now died of COVID, right? right? That's right off Canada's website. Yeah.

And I mean, you're talking about different countries. I mean, people love to talk about Israel, but I mean, UK is another one. The United States is another one. They're all ahead of us. And you can't extrapolate that everything they go through we're going to experience here. We're different countries, different parts of the world, etc. But you can look at it and go, huh, that's concerning. And if we rewind the clock, we were billed as you get two shots.

that's all you're going to need. You're going to be safe and protected and whatever. And we can all go back and pull up the news clips that talk about 96% effective. And as time goes on, they start to realize, oh, wait. Actually, it's anywhere between, you know, and I've read multiple studies. Some say two months. Some say five months. But it doesn't matter. At the end of the day, you're going to need boosters, which is, you know, once again, I've heard an interesting thing that says, you know, the best hope is this turns into the flu where it's just like another flu vaccine. Now, that sounds to me and you like, oh, but it's like, well, the flu vaccine is your choice and we just carry on with life and you get to have the choice

in it. What me and you stare at is like, I'm making the choice. They can sit there and say I'm doing this crazy research and everything else, but if you go to government of Canada's website or all your provincial websites and look at the data they have or you go to this thing called the CDC or I don't know the FDA or I'll just keep listing off all the government that they give you all the information and go do some reading which I don't know gets labeled people doing research you can just start to see like man there's some like real oddities here that don't just add up and are controversial and so you rewind back the clock and you go to what you're just saying is body autonomy it's like well I do get the choice because once it's in

I don't have like, there's no pulling back out. That's right. So that is, that is an interesting thing. Sorry. No, that's fine. So, yeah, I have yet to find anything really compelling that suggests that these work, how they were marketed, like regarding remaining at the injection site as opposed to a biodistribution all throughout the body.

They're not as safe. Just to hop in. Sorry, I said I was going to pull up the actual number of people in all of Canada, as reported October 16th, 2021. It's 676. Now, I mean, compared to the amount of deaths for the unvaccinated over the course of the past year, it's not nearly as big, obviously. But I don't ever hear 676 anywhere because that's a pretty decent number for supposedly everybody being protected. This isn't just dying. This is dying. from COVID. Anyways, I digress. No, no. And I think based on history being one of our better teachers, the countries that have already experienced greater hospitalizations and death of the fully vaccinated, I think we will see that in a matter of months.

I could be wrong. I hope I am. I hope I am. But I hope you're wrong. But I, but I'm not optimistic about that. I think we are just repeating the same strategy of those nations. Therefore, we will likely repeat the same outcome. I think that's logical.

I hope by then we have enough humility to realize that this is not the single solution to this problem and that there are other solutions that exist. that we can speak about that. Well, I've had multiple people on talk about early treatment. And I think what's interesting about early treatment is it goes across the board. So whether you're vaccinated or unvaccin, it doesn't matter. Like we should all know how powerful vitamins are for one. And then there's a multitude of drugs.

I mean, it's been brought up on this show an awful lot. People know what it is. You go to the FLCCC or the CCCA. They're two different groups that can provide. all the early treatment ideas known to man right now on the planet that have shown some ability to reduce hospitalization in particular because we all, I think on this show, we know if you've been listening or go back through the episodes, the earlier it's administered once you come down with COVID, the stronger likelihood you're not going to have the longer, more serious effects.

what what is hard for my brain this is where I'm at Dan like I go okay so governments won't talk here in Canada specifically won't talk about any early treatment that's that's blasphemy I just had the CEO of Icore labs blood services talk about how you know the whole point of getting the vaccine the injection is that you develop anybody specific to COVID and he runs tests on people with without and with the jab that both have the antibodies. But the government only will recognize if you had the jab. And you go, well, that doesn't make any sense, right? Like, if we're trying to get people to get back to normal and society back to where we are, we should, I just keep coming back to it. We should be using every single tool known to man because there's a part of the population that is terrified for their own individual reason, whatever it is, some of its medical conditions.

I don't know how many people have reached out now that have had the first jab, had adverse effects, and are not allowed to get a medical exemption. There's religious reasons that people don't want to that are getting denied. And it just keeps going down the line. And so we're at this like really odd part of the story, because obviously we can't see where this ends, of like, there's a lot of things that don't make sense that like that make complete sense, but nobody's talking about or acknowledging even exist. Yeah, well, that leads me to my second theme. So the first one being general vague blanket statements and the use of specific language, like we know this and we know, like, these facts are irrefutable. As if the science is completely settled, end of story. Anyone who denies it is a science denier.

And then the, so the second theme, I have noticed. consistently is that anyone, whether they're a legitimate scientist in a field of virology, immunology, vaccine development, biology, the list goes on. Critical care physicians that have been treating COVID patients this entire time, that any of those experts that offer information contrary to the official narrative are immediately attacked in the mainstream media, social media, some are completely de-platformed off of YouTube, you know, social media like Instagram. No, they are having to find alternative means to get their message out there like Odyssey and, you know, for video as an example or telegram is a big one.

I've noticed like, you know, all the heavy hitters are using those apps now to try and continue pushing their message out there. And so that is a major concern. Yeah, I think that's dangerous on multiple levels. One, like, I remember when Trump got removed from Twitter. And me and one of my brothers having an argument about it. And I said, you got to be careful. Like, I was like, and this is me at that time. I was like, like Trump just pretty much from his tweets,

everybody understood like somebody should take control of that thing because he's just saying some absolutely crazy things. Yeah. And then he gets pulled from it. And I think there was a good majority of just went, that's probably better for society if he gets yanked from it. What I didn't understand at that time was by making the precedent of being able to pull the president in the United States. That makes anybody be able to pull for Twitter for anything they say.

That's right. Which, you know, now we're trying to define what hate speech or what, you know, like what is it, it's this or it's this. Well, now you're starting to see like reputable people being yanked for their beliefs, their thoughts. The whole point of social media platforms is that. So it's whatever. Twitter wants to make their decision. Okay. So now you have something like telegram startup.

And telegram is an interesting, an interesting beast because what happens when, you know, I like following, let's say I'm a Trump supporter. And I like following everything Trump does. Now Trump's not a lot on Twitter where people can actually argue with them because you have two sides. Now you pull one side and put it over here on their own social media. Well, the only people going over there for the most part, Dan. is people that want to hear that message. Now there's nothing to contradict it. So you've lost.

I keep coming up to this theme. And I don't know how we get to where we can bring it back. But debate, right? Discussion. Like not even debate. Like I don't, everybody sees it as win-lose. I see discussion as like, me and you want to sit there and listen to two of the brightest virologists talk about this thing.

Like I would be extremely interested in that. I'm all right. Oh, that's interesting. Oh, okay. and back and forth. But there's none of it. There's no back and forth. You said the science is settled. And what I keep hearing all scientists say is the science has never settled. Never settled. That's anti-scientific. That's right. And so what censorship is doing is it's pulling all these people from one side or one thought process, removing it from the public discourse. And they're going

and making their own spot where it's just them, which is dangerous in itself to everything. Yeah. So from my perspective on that, that is the censorship is one of the major safety signals about what is going on here and not just in Canada, like globally for the most part. From a police perspective in my previous years as an investigator, you know, when we are investigating an offense, we have to look at both sides of the story. Sometimes people don't wish to speak, and that's fine. Sometimes you have to act on minimal information because that's all that's available to you. But we are duty bound to gather all evidence, not just one side of the story. And we are also duty bound to investigate all different pieces of evidence to either attempt corroborate it, to determine if it's credible and valid, or to disprove it as the opposite.

And then when we submit a disclosure package to the Crown for a court process, if we do end up coming to the conclusion that we feel that there's enough evidence to lay a criminal charge. And that's different in different jurisdictions. Some places like British Columbia, my understanding, I've never worked there, but my understanding is you need to have prior charge approval by the crown whereas when i worked in the ucon we could lay charges without crown approval and then the crown would decide what to do with it from there i think bc maybe has gone that route just to try and uh make the the charges before the courts a little bit more manageable volume wise anyways when we submit our disclosure package to the crown the rule is full frank and fair

And that is in an effort to try and remain as objective as possible. And then it goes before the court and you have the crown argues their side. And then the defense argues their side. And both are permitted to have their own evidence heard before a judge or a jury. The judge and the jury, you know, specifically selected for a judge. maximum objectivity and then the judge or the jury then weighs all evidence both from the crown and from the defense to make their decision or their their verdict and that is completely absent in this situation you know this entire situation the you will not hear the counter

narrative unless you specifically go looking for it If all you do is listen to our government officials and our media, whether it's on television or on radio, you're only getting one side of the story. You're not getting all of the information. So something that is at the bedrock of our entire legal system, principles that are at the bedrock of our entire legal system to try and be as fair and transparent as possible and as objective as possible in deterrent. determining guilt when it relates to criminal law is completely being subverted for this specific situation. And often by people, well, I need to be careful what I say here, but a lot of these public health officials aren't elected officials.

So they hold a tremendous amount of influence, but we're not seeing, as members of the public, we're not seeing the evidence in which they are basing their decisions on. Like, I've looked. I've looked hard. And I will, I've mentioned this earlier in other interviews, and I'll mention it again here. The most detailed information I've been able to find in support of the vaccinations are just the fact sheets from the actual pharmaceutical companies, the developers. obviously there's a conflict of interest there and they they obviously want to market their product as safe and effective and maybe they maybe they believe it and especially for early on when it was initially beginning but even even those fact sheets I think the last time I checked it was updated as of September 27th around that date

And even those fact sheets are acknowledging some of the more serious adverse effects that are being observed post vaccination. Specifically for the MRNA vaccines, myocarditis, paracarditis, the inflammation of the heart, that's starting to get a little bit more exposure in mainstream media. The thrombosis blood clotting type events more so associated with the viral vector vaccines. And I mean, we did hear something about that early on with AstraZeneca. That was in the news. But then it was kind of debunked as though, oh, it's not a concern. It's no more than what we would expect from the general population anyway. Now, another thing that came up with my investigation of the fact sheets that I thought was interesting was the, remember when our government,

government was saying it doesn't matter what what vaccine you get like just get the get the soonest one as you can and then it even came out that you can mix and match um you know and and there's even some some indication that like possibly a Pfizer shot mixed with an AstraZeneca shot may actually provide an even broader spectrum of protection I don't know what they're basing that on I haven't been able to find it but I can tell you on the fact sheets from the pharmaceutical companies and this might be be a disclaimer. A business decision as well. That right on their fact sheets, it says there is no information related to combining with other products essentially.

Well, why would they, why would they do that, right? Exactly. Like you're competing against each other. That's right. You're trying to make, I mean, it's a really difficult thing to talk about because you're talking about people's lives. So all of us just have like this like moral thought process or maybe just me that goes like they're trying to do the best for human beings by developing these vaccines. It's coming from a place of let's save lives.

I do believe that. I want to believe that. I think I think we can all like for the most part. I think there's a big chunk of that. But you can't ignore the financial incentive to have the entire world. have a vaccine. Like, come on, I'm a sales guy. That's what I do for a living.

You're telling me my customer is 8 billion people and they're all going to need it, right? And all we've got to do is get this process through. Come on. Like, I understand it's human lives and that's a tough thing. But we can all sit back and go, yeah, there's a little bit of bias there, incentive, et cetera, to go. And when you talk about the different. vaccines. Yeah, I think we can all just, it's hard because this year has been one of the longest, shortest things I've ever had to experience, obviously for all of us. I remember when AstraZeneca

got canceled in the United States. Canada still deemed it safe. And then we started using it. And then we deemed it not safe. And there are still other countries in the world that still went on to use AstraZeneca. Think about it. Oh, yeah. Right. Like, and you're like, oh, okay. So obviously, our government right away is just trying, well, it isn't that bad. We can still use it because, you know, it's going to outweigh the risk. Well, no, they deem that not. And then I got friends and family who've had the mix and match well before they ever, they have no studies on that.

How could they possibly have a study on that yet? Like, they don't. So now we just got to sit back and see what happens. I mean, hopefully nothing happens, right? But at the same time, for them to come out and say it's safe or, you know, it provides an even better protection is complete BS because how could they possibly know that? Well, they say that they do or that there's evidence suggesting it, but where's the evidence? I have been unable to find it. And, you know, perhaps that's because I've.

But the same people will go natural immunity. You know, there's only limited, we only know a little bit about natural immunity. It's like discounting what natural immunity is across like, I mean, natural immunity. the more you dig into that and start to understand what natural immunity can provide a person. I'm not saying, saying everybody run out and get COVID. I'm just saying, like, once you've had it, like, they're saying, oh, you know, we only have a limited data on how it reacts to COVID. Well, that is, that's not a lie. That's true.

Because COVID, I mean, COVID-19 is relatively new. So they can say that. But that's like discounting the other part where it's like, well, natural immunity has been around for a long time. We should talk about that. know. Well, and there's ways that you can strengthen your immune system. And that's been completely missing from the conversation unless you've been paying attention to the counter narrative. Unless you've been digging and like and doing your own research, which now they're starting to point at,

people doing their own research are falling into these pitfalls of of X, Y, and that's laughable to make. Yeah, I, you know, I, I find that ironic that they would label that as a negative in that people doing their own research and thinking for themselves. You know, I know that we have to be careful about putting ourselves in these little echo chambers that we only hear the side of the story that we want to hear and confirmation bias. And so it's true. Yeah. No, finish your thought.

Sorry. I'm not impervious to that by any means, but I've really tried to make an effort to give them the official narrative, the benefit of the doubt. And I've tried really hard to find the information that would support their position. And it's, it's minimal in my, in my findings, it's minimal. And then they attack anyone who, who counters that position. So that being that second theme that I had spoken about. So the first theme, the second theme.

And then the third theme, which is the weirdest one, is the inappropriate analogies. I don't know if you had heard me mention that before. Seat belts, helmets, seatbelts, helmets, body armor. And I fail to see how that is even in the same conversation. Like, yeah, okay, I can kind of see it's a level of protection. but those are items that are on the outside of my body. I can take them off. I know the advantages and the limitations because they've been around for decades. And as opposed to this novel technology that it's going inside my body, which once it's in, that's it.

I have no, I'm trusting that it's going to behave the way. way it's supposed to behave and it's not going to lead to some serious adverse event that could permanently disable or even kill me. So I don't think those belong in the same conversation at all. Well, and let's take seatbelts for a second. You know, um, you know, they talk about it being something for your safety. Absolutely true. They talk about there being resistance to when it first came out. Absolutely true. Mm-hmm. But then they fail to mention, you know, the exceptions to the rule. I don't know.

I'll point one out right away. School buses don't have seatbelts on them. So, sure, for a majority of the population, sure, seatbelts are great. I'm not going to discount that. I'm not going to discount. There's data right behind saving lives, everything else. But what I see more and more from people who are not willing to get vaccinated towards the end, I'm speaking vaccination rate here.

is they got some pretty good reasons, right? Even to the people who've been vaccinated once and had some pretty bad things happen, and they're just like, no. Then you got all these medical professionals who worked through the worst of COVID, who've been infected with COVID, who have natural immunity,

have the antibodies to prove it, and they won't recognize it. It's like that rate there makes zero sense then. And once you get to zero sense, this isn't about COVID anymore. It's about something different. Because we should be doing everything under, our umbrella of how to protect people to protect them and to get out of COVID as soon as possible.

Because I think the safest, the longer this goes on, we're starting to understand the, like the mental health aspect of this, the loss of livelihood, the division of society. I mean, like this has entered everyone's family across Canada, maybe the world now of like differing thoughts and we just can't seem to move past it because mainstream. the government rules that are being put out to the population, everywhere you go now. You want to go watch your kids hockey game? That's good.

I don't know. Can you show me some papers? It's like, really? To go sit and stands? Yeah, just to participate in societal norms. That's right. And I don't, I know one of the concerns that they have consistently spoken about is the asymptomatic

spread. And I don't, I don't know, I can't speak to that. I, I'm not, That's not my field of expertise. And I haven't even looked into that deeply to educate myself on.

But there have been a number of studies indicating that even the fully vaccinated can carry the same or greater, at the very least, the same viral loads as the unvaccinated. And they can be just as transmissible as the unvaccinated. You know, we have seen that language change over time. And I specifically always refer back to the CDC, like the change in language that I have noticed all along with them. Because they're the big one, right? It seems to me that most of the Western world is following the lead of the United States, including us. So, you know, initially the language was it's safe and effective. It's the best tool.

And then it's slowly progressed to you're less likely to be symptomatic. you're less likely to be transmissible. And then it has now progressed to the point where it's like fully vaccinated people still need to follow public health measures because they can be just as transmissible specifically to the Delta variant, which the information I've seen indicates that we're probably roughly 90% of new cases are Delta. So if that is the case, and I've seen a recent video. montage posted by Robert Malone, where it has the Minister of Health from Israel speaking to the

FDA on like a Zoom call type meeting, acknowledging that these vaccines do not prevent transmission and that they're seeing increased breakthrough infections and hospitalizations. And then it goes to the UK Minister of Health, same information. And I think those two countries, they were almost like 50 to 60 percent of hospitalizations. were breakthroughs. And then it goes to even the CDC director acknowledging the same thing, conceding that these do not prevent transmission and that the protection was wearing off. And they may have to change the definition of fully vaccinated, you know,

speaking to the rollout of their booster program. And then it even has a clip of Dr. Fauci right after saying that like the goal is to prevent clinical disease, not necessarily infection. And then it finishes off with even the CEO of Moderna stating the same thing that these do not prevent these, they cannot completely commit that these prevent transmission. Right. So when you're even seeing that acknowledgement from all of these very public health failures in our respective nations, um, that argument about.

how you have to do it to protect others doesn't seem to hold true. And I think that's probably one of the biggest reasons that people did jump on it right away. Now, I'm not denying that COVID can be very serious for some people. I even have concerns about it myself, but I've taken many measures to try and make myself resilient. And based on all of the things we just spoke about, I feel as though it's more, it should be more a choice based on an individual's risk assessment as to what they're willing to subject themselves to. I do believe I'm recovered. I have had my blood tested twice.

There is some indication that I have a level of immunity to spike. now, but I've discussed that with Dr. Stephen Pellick. I spoke to him on the telephone for like two hours a few nights ago. And he indicated that the test that I took was likely inadequate. So I can't say definitively that I have natural immunity to COVID-19, but I do suspect that that is the case. Now, but all of that aside, this is my own individual risk assessment. I don't believe that there's any evidence in support of the argument that this is this prevents transmission to others. Therefore, you need to do it to protect others.

The most I've been able to find supporting that argument is there was an article I read in it was either nature or science, specifically saying that there was some indication that it could reduce infection and transmissibility towards the original. Wuhan virus by I think it was like 76 or 78 percent but even in that own in that very article right in there it might have even been in bold print the researchers that conducted that study openly acknowledged that with the delta it's completely uncertain so that's where I feel it's this is more about an individual's risk assessment it's the argument about you have to it to protect others doesn't hold water with me. I don't believe that. Now, while I was doing a dive into the vaccine safety and effectiveness, mostly at that time for my own personal decision-making,

I came to learn about this depression of early treatments, which we touched on already. And I feel like that is that could possibly be the the the the the the an even larger problem from my perspective in that if we are knowingly not not we if if government officials are knowingly suppressing um early treatments that critical care physicians and uh other doctors all around the world have been using for months and months, probably even closing it on a year. Well, I'll go to Mexico is at least December 2020.

So we're closing in on at least a year. Yeah. So they've been using these off-label drug protocols, multi-drug protocols, and reducing hospitalization, reducing death. And there's even a significant amount of information that would suggest that it's quite effective at preventing transmission and infection. And you see the opposite stance on the treatment protocols from our health officials saying insufficient evidence, insufficient evidence. And then they'll deliberately focus on like one or two studies of concern that have, you know, have been like El Ghazar has been accused of scientific fraud, essentially.

you know, however my understanding is that he wasn't even permitted an opportunity to respond and argue his position. The Carvalo study down in Peru, I think, is another one that's been called into question. But overall, there is way more evidence in support of some of these off-label drugs out there that is ready to access at your fingertips if you just search, like you said, the FLCCC, the Canadian COVID Carolina. Yeah. Yeah. The bird group in the UK, they're all saying the same thing. There are drug protocols that greatly reduce hospitalization and death.

And like you said, the earlier, the better. So do not let this progress to the point where people are having difficulty breathing because the longer it progresses, the harder it. is to bring them back. And yet, our standard of care for outpatients who test positive is nothing. And it has been that way from the beginning. I don't know if there's been any work done on improving that. But the last time I checked the Public Health Canada website, it was the same as it was originally. It's like isolate from your family, mask in your house, you know, when appropriate, hydrate, manage your fever essentially and rest.

And if it becomes difficult to breathe, come to the hospital. Like, well, that doesn't make any logical sense to me. Why for something that we are so scared of or that we've been led to believe is going to kill like such a percentage of the population, are we not implementing every tool that's available to us? Like you said, you know, we're going to have. a percentage of the population that will not be vaccinated. We're going to have breakthrough infections. I believe that the people who were vulnerable all along due to their age or comorbidities will

continue to be vulnerable based on the information I've heard from the medical science community on the counter-narrative side. And so therapeutics are going to have to play a role regardless, regardless of your stance on the vaccine, you're going to need therapeutics. And then, so insufficient evidence is the token line. Yet, if you scratch the surface of the ivermectin issue, for example, I'm sure you've talked about it at length, you're going to find that there's a mountain of evidence. And I think that's even the quoted line from Dr. Pierre Corey when he testified in front of the Senate committee.

And that was, I think that was either back in November or December of 2020. So we've known about these things for a long time. And we're not even entertaining the possibility that they could be used. If you look at the Public Health Canada website, I believe that we're taking our lead directly from the NIH. And so we're basically just doing whatever the United States does. And for example, the last time I checked, if you looked at the vaccine safety trials, 17 out of 18 of them,

link directly to the NIH website. So there's a little numerical identifier on the approved trials. Now, and 70, for the therapeutics, it was 73 out of 91 trials link to the NIH website. And those studies, full disclosure, they do, if you read some of the, details on the NIH link when you follow the link to the NIH website it speaks specifically to partnership and collaboration with different researchers and facilities here in Canada I think one in particular that I can recall off the top of my head was the University of Saskatchewan I don't know what level of involvement we have in in those studies but we definitely have an association to the NIH that is undeniable.

And when you look at the therapeutics, like I said, the 73 of the 91 linked to the NIH, you can go through those. There are the odd one, the odd study, whether it's concluded or not, that relate to other things that have had some attention like hydroxychloroquine and vitamin D, vitamin C, you know, but zero. related to ivermectin. Zero out of 91 studies approved by the government of Canada involved the use of ibermectin in the treatment of COVID-19,

even though we know that that has been like a fundamental part of these drug protocols that physicians have been using and advocating for and other countries have gone on entire campaigns of distribution. And yet we claim insufficient evidence, but out of 91 trials, we haven't even supported one study involving it. Interpret that as you may, but from my perspective as a police officer who's supposed to look at evidence in decision making, I think that's negligent. And I think they are deliberately misleading the population about there being insufficient evidence in support of this.

And attacking it as horse dewormer. people are using hors d when we're in veterinary medicine you know it won the Nobel Prize for its use in human beings in 2011 there was an article published um by the NIH referring to it as a wonder drug for its use in human beings so well we all all we got to do is is just i mean just search a couple videos showing uh CNN what they said yeah what Joe Rogan and then and then I mean, go listen to Sanjay Gupta on Joe Rogan, right? He apologizes. Yeah, it's, it's, but that's the thing.

Like, uh, when media comes out and or even a headline on social media says one thing, man, there's got to be a thousand million studies on it. And I'm being a little bit tongue in cheek, but there's got to be a ton of studies on how people react to social media headlines. Oh wow. I didn't know that. And they just keep going and just kind of like, uh, you know, hearing it over and over and over and over again.

Um, but. how it affects, you know, the consumer, the person, right? Because, I mean, the horse dewormmer thing, just sticking on that for just a second. It implemented, or it came filtered all the way down to our local media stations and stuff, you know, where the, and where they're joking, they have running ads that are joking about people taking horse dewormer and or, you know, all these different herbal concoctions to, get COVID or to fight COVID-19 and, you know, just be smart and take the vaccine. The newest one I saw that was that has nothing to do with that, I actually couldn't believe, I was like, is this an actual video talking about it? But it was erectile dysfunction.

You're six times more likely to have erectile dysfunction if you don't get the vaccine than if you get COVID. Is that because it's related to Pfizer? Hey, I'm telling you, like I saw that. I was like, oh, all right. Like that, that's a new one that came across. Yeah, I've never seen that one yet. Well, I'll make sure to send it to you because it's almost hilarious that that's a video.

Regardless, I thought this interesting of bringing you on. And I assume a guy that's in your profession, Dan, you know, you're not a doctor. No. Okay. I'm not a doctor. You're not, you know, a virologist, epidemiology. you know, just go down the list. What you are is you're a cop and cops are supposed to be investigators. They're supposed to be upholders of the truth. You're supposed to look at things from

objective points of view to see both sides and then, you know, when it gets presented to court, have both sides presented and then let the evidence weigh out to where it should. In reading your guys's letter on Mounties for Freedom, I highlighted this. A proper investigation should be conducted as objectively as possible and follow the principle that is better to have questions that cannot be answered than to have answers that cannot be questioned. And it goes on to say a complete investigation must include full disclosure of all the facts of the case, even contradictory evidence. But I highlighted have questions that cannot be answered than to have, it's better to have questions that cannot be answered, sorry, than to have answers that cannot be questioned.

And right now we have answers that cannot be questioned at all. That's 100% it. Yeah. I don't think like, you know, does it mean what you talk about is 100% right? No, actually, I bet you there's going to be people that point things out. Well, I already know. You mentioned earlier on, you go down the rabbit hole, you got to be careful of confirmation bias and all these things. I 100% agree. But the other side has the same problem, right? You got to do the same thing on your side. Both sides have the same problem. It isn't just one side that gets stuck in confirmation bias. If all you listen to is the mainstream media and never question any of it. It's like, well, then you're in your own confirmation bias. Simple as that. Like we're both, we're both playing the same game, just different stories.

Yeah. And what's interesting and what I find really hard is this thing like, here's the answer, don't question it. And as a police officer, I assume that stares you right in the face and go, what are we doing? This makes zero sense. Yeah. So that, that's probably the largest, or the most concerning warning signal to me about what is going on here. And like you had mentioned earlier about how discounting natural immunity makes you wonder if this is about public health. And I'm convinced it's more about compliance now than it is about public health for a number of reasons. The discounting natural immunity is one of them.

Again, increasing amount of evidence. I think last I heard it was like over 90. 90 studies, 90 independent studies showing that natural immunity from people recovered is more robust and long lasting than what the vaccine can provide. And yet we're still telling people that they need to do it even after they've recovered. I don't, from the people I've spoken to recently, Dr. Stephen Pellick being one of them, he said it makes no sense. there's absolutely no scientific basis behind that statement to try and encourage people. I think my suspicion is that they just want to hit that that goal percentage, whether it's 90% or whatever. Yeah, but nobody can even tell us what the goal is.

Well, I know. It keeps shifting, right? In Alberta, it was 70%. It was 70. And actually, and actually there's people out there that will remind me that it was less than that in the beginning. but I digress because I can't you know there's so many numbers coming at us all the time it's like taken information by water hose when it comes or by fire hose when it comes to this but like it was 70 and then you know I had a doctor on said you know 80 maybe 85 well in Alberta you know I think

we're at 80 well hell I'll pull that up too but I mean you get the point like we're we're we're we're getting to the point where we're there and actually if they I don't know this is just me but if they went, listen, we're not going to pay for it because we're not going to pay for you getting sick because that's going to put a financial burden on the system if you get sick and have to go to the hospital and blah, blah, blah, I can just, I can be a politician and say it the proper way. But if you want to go out and pay $120 to go to and, you know, I'll use Mike Kismiscus company, ICorps, because they were just on. But if you want to go to IICOR labs, pay $120 and see if you've had it and you got this number and put it as a high number for all I care,

I think you'd have a run on people going to do that on their own dime because they're already haven't to spend their own dime on negative tests and everything else. And boom, all of a sudden we're at 92%. Okay, what the heck are we doing here? Why are we spending all this money on implementing something that shows you that you have your papers, right? There's going to be people that don't have it. And if you go, okay, well, you haven't had it. You don't have the shot.

You've got to still pay for negative tests. Okay. We're giving options. We're taking all the options away. There's people right now that have. had COVID. And I don't want, I'm no doctor. I'll say that over and over again.

And let's just for argument, say they just had COVID in the last three months. They've had the antibody test. It shows they have as robust. Geez, I never thought I'd say that word so many times in my life. Immunity to something or the antibodies to protect themselves. But they're not allowed in restaurants, bars, well, all these non-essential service. services, which a gym's a non-essential service, which just makes me laugh. Like, why aren't we promoting a person's health?

Right. Like we talk about all the before all this happened, this has got to be my most frustrating thing. I just keep thinking, you know, what was the big push before COVID hit? Mental health, treating others with kindness, learning about all these things we're all doing and guilty of to make people feel like shit. Pardon the French to some of my listeners. I try not to swear. but hey, sometimes it just gets to this absurdity level.

I feel like we're at it. Like, it just, all we preached was be kind to one another and make sure we're, you know, we're teaching everybody about all these things about, you know, all these minorities and public health and mental health and all these mental health illnesses and everything else. And now here we sit and we're staring at a chunk of the population and we're throwing everything at them. You guys are nuts. You guys are, you know, you know what I mean. And it's like all that stuff we learned a year and a half ago.

Don't worry about that. They're killing people. And that's all you need to know. Yeah. Well, one thing that is very concerning to me and should be to most is the language that they're using in order to divide the population. And like you said, prior to this, everything was about trying to destigmatize. Thank you. De-stigmatized.

Don't put labels on people. don't, don't stigmatize people, don't marginalize people. And now with this, it's like, it's a concerted effort to do that as one more pressure tactic, you know, making people feel like they're stupid and uneducated and they don't deserve an ICU bed if they get sick based on their idiotic decision not to vaccinate. Whereas I think most people I've spoken to that have chosen the same path I have chosen, have educated themselves far more than most people who just went along with what they thought they were supposed to do by taking the vaccine. And I'm not trying to, I don't want to create division with those people.

If that's what they decided to do based on their own decision-making process, I fully support your decision. If that's what you think was the right thing to do, I will never criticize you for that. I chose a different path and I feel like I have legitimate reasons for doing so. And most people in my position have legitimate reasons for doing so. Why can't we, like you said, have the discussion to seek to understand each other's position as opposed to attacking each other's position. Right. Like you said, it goes both ways. Like I don't like people labeling me an anti-vaxxer, but I'm not going to turn around and call them a sheep.

right i i don't believe that that is the that's the solution to this problem i think that's just going to propagate it and make it and i think that's that's uh a fault on both sides actually i agree right is like because i've heard you know like i just rewind this it's like do i think all vaccine like the vaccine right now is terrible actually i think there's some data that shows that you know like it works it isn't killing if it was killing everyone i think we both can agree we We would know a bunch of people in the street dying everywhere. And the, right? So like the fear mongering tactics on both sides are pretty wild to watch.

I think where majority of people get upset, if they've had it, is there being labeled cheap by the one side. I'm glad you said the word because it's like, yeah, I don't think. That's an attack on someone's intelligence. Right. Right. And it's anti-vaxxers an attack on someone's intelligence on the other side. That's it. And it's just labels.

And at the end of the day, whatever reason. there's really smart people that got vaccinated, right? Like, great. There's really smart people that aren't. Great. We should be able to carry on and get along with one another. Instead, we're not. And it's really hard to watch.

All of us get caught up in the... Us versus them? Yeah. Yeah. Honestly. You know, like, I want to bring up the numbers so people don't think I'm talking out of my ass. it's 87.2% of 12 plus population has at least one dose in Alberta. 80.6 has both dosage, both doses.

Now, what people are going to say, Dan, to me, because I can already hear them coming, because it has us in brackets. They've put this up on the Alberta website since those numbers. That means only 74.2% of the entire population has one dose, or 68.5 has two. But that's, so we know that. So then if I'm the politician,

I can see what's coming here, five to 11 year olds, and I don't know, I got young kids. I can, everybody knows my thoughts on this. But if I'm like, you know what, to ease some of the tension that's going to come when the five to 11 year olds come, because I sat and listened to the FDA's eight hour long thing. And in there,

doctors are raising concerns about like, I don't want to allow this if it becomes black and white, like every kid you should get this, but they should have the option if parents think it's necessary. Okay. So right now, knowing that natural immunity, even though they won't admit it, is good. You could be getting your kids tested because, oh, wait, there's outbreaks all over the schools of kids testing positive for COVID. It's the biggest population that's had COVID. If you go to any website, it's almost like an inverse graph, if that makes sense.

The population that tests positive for COVID the most is the youngest. And the people who die the most are the oldest. Or the oldest, right? So it's like it goes big to small on one side and then small to big on the other side. It's just so right now, if you're the Alberta government, I'm speaking Alberta, that's where I'm sitting. I'd be like, listen, if you are, you know, you want to make sure about your child, you're worried about them. How about we, you know, we've thrown so many billions of dollars of this. How about we allow children to go get tested to see if they've had COVID? If they've had COVID, chances are they're fine.

But they won't do that. No. And that would take our number from 68.5 of the total population. If we started acknowledging that, who knows where we're sitting right now? I suspect it would be significantly higher. I also feel very strongly about the children. You know, the counter-narrative medical science community is trying to scream it to the world that, like, You do not need to do this. You are potentially creating way more harm than good by doing this. Children are very, very resilient to this disease, regardless of what you've been told this entire 22 months,

whatever it is that we're going on here. But I agree, they're also saying that like targeted protection is probably a good idea, right? We've mass vaccinated the majority of the adult population, even though maybe it wasn't necessary. And now we're going to do that to our children when it is statistically clear. That is completely unnecessary.

And, you know, the myocarditis, paracarditis, heart inflammation seems to be affecting young, healthy people adolescent males in particular pretty significantly, like to the point where it can't be ignored, even even public health officials are acknowledging that. Where countries have pulled the use of like Moderna from people under 30. So I don't know the, I don't know what the specifics are for the vaccine for kids five to 11. But I just can't understand why you would do that if you don't have to. And I've even heard like Dr. Payne was saying on your podcast, right?

I just listened to that recently. He was saying like this is not like influenza. Children do not super spread this like influenza. Like they're far more likely to get it from home, from an adult. So, you know, the argument about we have to do it to avoid outbreaks in large public settings doesn't seem to hold water if you're taking into account people like Dr. of pain. But, you know, I just, I just come back to even if kids are super spreaders, let's just say they're super spreading it everywhere. The statistics show that, I mean, kids are pretty much, you know, like, I talk to a lot of teachers because I'm like, you know, right at the start

of the school year, I got young kids, they're having all these massive outbreaks. I'm like, oh, man, like, are, like, maybe I need to, you know, you have that thought go through your head of like, okay, guys should pay attention to this because what happens if a bunch of kids really start bad things start happening, which knock on what will not happen. I don't want that to happen. And the same thing keeps getting brought up. Yeah, we had a bunch of kids get sick. No, they're all good. They're all back to school within a short amount of time. Like, okay, well, you're seeing like, you know, everybody talks about like long COVID. And once again, I'm, this is not like, this isn't bringing together all the medical community. This is just.

just my area's experience with it. And it's like, no, no, actually, all the kids are pretty good. Like, they're bounced back real fast. Okay. So when it comes to children and in Alberta specifically, there's one kid under 19 who's passed away from it, which is horrendous. But we all can remember Hinshaw talk about it. And then the family came out and spoke that the kid had stage four cancer, right?

She issued a public apology for it. Right, which was a pretty poor public apology, in my opinion, regardless. So there's been one kid in all of Alberta in almost two years from this under the age of 19 that had, you know, you feel bad for the family that they had to be drugged through it and continue to get brought up. That shouldn't be any way any person has ever remembered. But I mean, that's just wild to me. But then you just, you extrapolate even that further. Okay, so kids can get COVID.

They're not being hurt by it, harmed by it for the majority, the overwhelming majority. So then you go, okay, well, we're doing it so we can protect the parents. Well, we've already had our opportunity. We either have this or we don't. And I have to keep reminding, and I've started hearing this a bit more, is like my kids don't need to protect me. If I get sick from this and they spread it to me, you know what? that's my choice and that is my fault if if that's if that's what happened but not even fault it's like you know I've got a five year old who will say things about uh COVID in particular that just

concern me I know you shouldn't be worrying about something like that shouldn't be worrying about if you're spreading it you shouldn't have to worry about wearing a mask walk around outside like dude I have to you know like I have to argue with him what the part from time to time just pull your mask off so it's okay you nothing nobody's going to hurt you you're Okay. For a five-year-old to be thinking and internalizing that is a wild statement. Have you read that Great Barrington Declaration? Absolutely. Okay. So I won't rehash that. But I mean...

No, but there might be people on, you know, that maybe haven't heard every episode. And the Great Barrington Declaration, if you want to talk about it for a few minutes. Yeah, absolutely. Well, it's a, it's a, I think it was written, published, October 2020. And it was primarily authored by three professors, you know, all in the germane fields like virology, epidemiologists, universities of medicine from Harvard, Oxford and Stanford. and they have 46 co-authors that signed as well from all medical science professionals from around the world. So on October 4th, 2020, I'll give you that. October 4th, 2020, there you know. It was originally designed by three people out of the United States.

Dr. Martin, I hope I'm pronouncing this right, Koldorf, professor of medicine at Harvard University, and it lists off a bunch of stuff. Dr. Sinatra, Gupta, professor at Oxford University and epidemiologist. and then Dr. J. Badahara. Batachara. He's at Stanford and he's a physician epidemiologist. You kind of get the idea.

And it's been signed by 860,000 signatures, right? And a huge chunk of which are medical professionals and everything else. And it basically just states, let's protect the weak, the vulnerable, people with underlying health conditions because basically what's going to happen is if we try and protect everyone, we're going to cause more harm than good. Which I think when we look back on this in the future, we will see that was probably the case. You'd mentioned mental health earlier. I have friends that work at the Children's Hospital here in Ottawa.

And they said like it's they've never seen so many admissions. regarding that from young people regarding mental health. These mandates right now, like they're having a tremendous impact on the mental health of people in my position. And, you know, even my own family, you know, every morning I wake up and I have this little mantra that I tell myself, like, be strong for your kids. they need you to be strong right now. And, you know, even see behaviors from them. They're acting out in their own way because I'm sure they can feel the tension in the household. And they know what is at stake with me.

I've tried to be very honest with them about the consequences that I'm facing right now. And they know that it's a possibility that we might have to move. And this is their home. This is where they've grown up. But I might have to leave here just in order to, find alternative employment employment that can offer my family the same type of lifestyle you know so there's and then the and then there's the entire economic side for business closures etc right that i don't i don't think i don't think all of the measures that we're putting in place

right now have the the benefit cost ratio i think we're going to look back on this in the future and realize that our response to this was completely inappropriate. You know, the people who wrote that Barrington declaration, they advocate focus protection, like you said, like the vulnerable, the people that have the comorbidities and that are in the age cohorts that are the most at risk. And, you know, vaccination, even with the current vaccines, could be a part of that. and most people should have been, according to them, most people should have been allowed to live their normal lives.

And we would have been, likely would have been much faster in reaching herd immunity that way with natural, you know, natural infection, natural immunity because, you know, I don't, I don't know how many people received dirty treatment, but I, I know a number of people. and I believe the majority of people who recovered from COVID in this country likely recovered just by staying at home and treating it as if they were recovering from any other kind of cold or flu. And I know they're not the same. I'm not trying to say that the COVID and the flu are the same. But the recovery method has been the same, right? Yeah. And see, I always implore Dan people when they listen, if they come down with COVID,

and they're not, well, even actually, now as it starts to spiral, I don't even care what your vaccination status is. I mean, if you've been vaccinated, maybe you can kind of glaze over this part. But if you, for sure, unvaccinated, I would not treat it as the flu. No. I would be, have already have done my research. because if you ever come down with it, I think from my anecdotal information that I've seen around me, the people who enacted early treatment, like immediately, way better off than the people that just thought it was the flu and they were just going to get over it. They had a tough anywhere between five to three weeks of pain and some of them end up in the hospital.

And that itself right there, you go like, treat it seriously, understand, and look into the protocol. calls. If you've been vaccinated, you know, like I'm sure there's a ton of people that are getting over it and having mild. I've heard that mild, but you have to understand that there are risks with that too, right? Like, we're starting to see that more. And if we follow countries across the pond, it's more than likely going to become more prevalent here as we go along. Yes. And we're, we're just coming into winter, right? Like, we're just getting into peak viral, viral cold and flu season. So I fully suspect we'll see a fifth wave, hopefully less hospitalization, hopefully less death, potentially because a lot of vulnerable people have already been through that with the previous waves.

But I don't think that people can just count on the vaccine alone as the savior. I think we need to have other tools and other strategies in place to mitigate the damage. You know, I'd copied a multiple things from the Mounties for Freedom letter. I thought it was a very, very, I suggest people go to Mountiesforfreedom.com, correct? Well, if you search Mountiesfor Freedom.com, you'll get access to the letter still. But we had some issues with our website. It possibly attacked. Okay.

So we moved it over to Mountiesforfreedom.com. And that's where you'll be able to access the website in its entirety. And the letter is within that website as well. I would really suggest people go read the letter. The letter is different than like an Eric Payne letter that, you know, is very focused on the medical side of it. This is very much focused on what cops do and investigating. and understanding

legalities and stuff like that. One of the things in there that I've written down is the criminal code explains that consent is not obtained from a person who submits or neglects to resist on the grounds of authority being exercised over them. How then can someone give proper consent to a COVID-19 treatment injection

when doing so under the threat of losing their job, freedoms, or livelihood? And as we all know right now, there's a chunk of the population, maybe small as it be that are being pushed to those extreme measures. Once again, I just bring it back. You know, we've talked an awful lot about early treatment and different things that are anomalies that just don't make sense to us.

But from an active officer's standpoint, I don't even know the question to ask. Like, that makes sense to me because I just look at what you're talking about, Dan, and I go, like, you investigate things for a living. I mean, I know maybe that isn't your current job detail. But through your profession, that is what the profession is. You get a call, you go investigate. And right now, it feels like all of us are being told to not investigate anything. And I'm wondering from the group of, that is the RCMP, how difficult this is,

been to swallow the entire time on the on the group i'm not talking about society just on the group of rcmp officers you know ryan uh pain uh dr pain had talked about like the environment becoming very difficult you come from a family of rcmp you come from a brotherhood of rcmp that are there to uphold all the rights of everyone and right now it's being directed different differently. Can you just talk maybe about, I don't know, does that make sense? Yeah, absolutely. My environment specifically was quite supportive over like vast majority of my colleagues were very supportive in my decision making. You know, I was never, I was never mistreated by any of my colleagues. They're all real stand up people and intelligent people.

I can't speak for them as to all of their reasonings for why they decided to take the vaccine, but I probably similar to what you've heard the majority of the population. So, you know, probably they just want to get on with life and have the ability to participate in society. But that being said, they've all, no one has mistreated me within my home unit. I know that that has not been the case for many of the other members that I've been in frequent contact with since I joined Mounties for Freedom. Some members have been treated pretty poorly and discussions in public settings about their vaccination status. And, you know, hurtful, malicious things being said about the unvaccinated, like we mentioned earlier, about how stupid they are. And we shouldn't even waste time on them.

I know other members have experienced some of those things. And that's, that's regrettable. You know, I, fortunately for me, I belong to a group that is, that values respect. It's very disappointing for me to see that our senior executive has just completely laid down and accepted the Treasury Board's policy on this. To a degree, part of the reason why we felt we had to go public, we were hoping that we would have a strong response from our union on our behalf. like we mentioned earlier regarding the vaccine developers. I do believe that most of them are, this is hard for me to say.

I believe most of them are acting in what they believe is the best interest of the majority, but we were definitely hoping for a stronger defense on our behalf, which we have not received. And again, it's been individual's circumstance has been different for different people. My personal experience with my union rep has been fairly positive. He's been trying to help answer my questions as best as he can. Most of my questions have been geared towards my navigating the leave without pay and, you know, what's going to happen if I'm terminated?

because that's a reality for me that I'm aware of with my speaking out, I will definitely be disciplined. I don't know to what extent, but I fully expect it. So how does that impact me, the difference between resignation versus termination? I'm trying to navigate what is my best financial option long term. and I suspect that there's a very high likelihood I'll never wear a uniform for the RC&P ever again

but I don't know for sure I this is new to all of us other members have had a very negative experience with their union reps that's heartbreaking it is you know we were we were hoping for a real strong stance. But I think they've sought kind of the generic response that a lot of members have been receiving is that they sought legal opinion and that it was a charter challenge about like regarding discrimination towards us would likely fail. And it would not if it went before arbitration. Because of a specific article in our collective agreement regarding occupational health and safety, a charter challenge would probably, would most likely fail because it would be deemed reasonable at arbitration. Now, I don't know. I don't know who they received their legal opinion from.

I know other employment lawyers have taken the exact opposite approach with people who have consulted with independent legal counsel. But some people have even had responses indicating, like, well, you should just, I'm summarizing, but you, why don't you just take the vaccine based on the, I quote, preponderance of evidence for reduction in infection, reduction in transmission, and reduction of the likelihood of serious illness and death. Which I know that that's we, that's what our population has been constantly told by government and, and media.

But I don't believe that that is a position that our union, I don't believe that that's a, our union reps do not necessarily have the expertise to make those kind of claims in a response to a union member or to a member of the bargaining unit. And again, it's based on only one side, like we discussed in depth already. You know, I think that this is, this is a time where they're going to, this is a major test for unions as to how they're going to represent. Yeah. Not just us, but other healthcare workers, first responders, federal employees, anyone, anyone who is part of a union that is currently subject to these mandates, you know, this is probably

the biggest test that they have faced to date. I was hoping for a stronger response, even to advocate for options. You know, like you said, recognizing natural immunity. you know, but there's no, there's no, no gray area that has been explored to my knowledge about advocating for options. Or even, you know, we're being told that being placed on administrative leave without pay is not supposed to be viewed as punitive or disciplinary. I think, well, I would argue that steadfastly, considering like, we all have lives and mortgages and families that we're trying to support. It's not like, I don't know how they are, what precedent they are basing these actions on. I haven't done a really deep dive into case law that would be surrounding leave without pay, or,

at all, but, you know, I have seen other mention of, you know, a suspension, a suspension that was administered, I think it was in the private sector. And even after the courts, it was challenged and the courts ruled that the suspension was reasonable, but they still awarded the the suspendee, the employee that had been suspended with with payment because they didn't believe that it was it was worthy of a suspension without pay. And now it just hurts your, it just hurts your brain to listen to listen to how many things you got to try and wrap your head around when all you're trying to do is make a choice for yourself and they won't allow it.

and they're employing every pressure tactic available to them beyond like taking away your ability to go to the grocery store. I mean, I hope I didn't just give them another idea. Well, it's already, we've already seen that rate there. We've already seen that happen in different countries. I can speak to a listener who talked about, and I, you know, maybe this has changed. But in Saskatoon, there was a grocery store that, uh, implemented that you need to be double vaccinated or proof of a negative COVID test to get in there.

So like, I think we got to all stop thinking this can't, you know, if I go right back to the start of our conversation, and I apologize, this is when sometimes I get off on tangents, but I've been thinking about it when you started bringing up all the different people you've been following, you know, the Brett Weinstein, the Joe Rogan, you know, the list that goes on and on. One of the things that I always thought when I first started listening to all those people, you know, Jordan Peterson. I thought, ha, this will never come to Little Town Lloyd Minster, right? Man, I've been wrong on that a lot. I've been wrong on that so many times it's not even funny. And when you utter the sentence of like, I hope it never gets to the grocery store thing, we go on, you know, like, I'm going to try and rationalize that out.

Like, that'll never happen. And yet, I've had a listener and send me a sign from a place that's close enough to me in my home, you know, where I grew up, my home province, where you were born, Saskatchewan, which I would argue is probably, you know, one of the freest parts of all of Canada right now. And it's already happened there, you know, and I always argued, you know, we'll never see anyone be forcibly removed from something by the RCMP or cops. I shouldn't just say RCMP, just police officials. And in Alberta, we had Ocean Wiseblatt skating on an outdoor ice surface and they deemed that right everybody saw that video and and uh i even if if people go back in the podcast far enough they can talk to me going like why why can he just get off the ice just get

off the ice like that's where i was at like just just just get off the ice and and and stop causing a scene right and now all i can think is i wish we were all in the ice causing the scene i agree because the longer this goes on we keep sitting there going like i hope it never gets that and I hope they won't use these pressure tactics, but listen to us talk about where we're at right now. They are, you know, we've had people in government and journalists and news media say, you know, when the carrot doesn't work, you resort to the stick.

And the fact, me and you both know the answer to that and what's going on is like, well, how hard are you going to hit with the stick? Now the thing I hear a lot of people talk about. This is across the board. This isn't just one set of people. This is people in general. It feels like we're starting to lose our humanity in that when the first whack with the stick didn't work, well, you whack them again.

This time a little harder. The next time's a little harder. And you're like, what are we going to do? I've joked about this. You don't give them bad ideas. This is a bad idea. But like, what are you going to do? You're going to tackle people and jab them in the arm so they have it.

Is that going to make you feel better? Is that going to make everybody feel better? And what do you lose in the process of doing that? one of the things that makes our country so great and why I've always been proud to be Canadian is our diversity like our yeah are there things politically that make no sense are there things politically that you wish were better yes yeah I can I can get on board with that but in general what makes us strong is the amount of critical thinking people we have across the board who see issues differently, who are willing to talk about them, who put our best foot forward at all times.

And all of that just feels like it's being wiped away. And I know that sounds apocalyptic. Yeah. Honestly, right? But I go, all I got to do is look back up my own self on ocean wise, Blatz one. Another of my good friends, me and him argue all the time. One of my brothers may argue all the time about things like this. And if I just go back to those conversations and I sat there now. If I could go back, you know, just do a time machine, go back like nine months. I think I'd stare at myself and go like, listen, you need to understand this is what's going to happen. And I don't know how we get out of this. Like, you know, my best case scenario, Dan, is that in a year's time, COVID has gone. Like, it's just, it's just, poof, it's gone. And,

you know, I, like, if I follow history and I read the different stories of smallpox and even the early cases of polio and they come in waves. Nobody has any idea on how many waves they're going to be. Nobody can sit there and go, we've got six waves. You got to get through six waves and that's what's going to be. Nobody can say it's going to be two waves. And the first waves, you know, like they all have ideas, but nobody can be like, this is how it's going to happen. And so my hope is that by next summer, things are just open and we're good to go and we just carry on with life. My fear is the longer this goes on, our way of life, which we're we cannot go back to even now. I don't think you can reverse course from a year and a half ago.

I think some damage has been done to people's ability to like see other people right now. It's going to take time to heal. Yeah. But my fear is, is in another six months, the longer this goes on where we start to implement things that are extremely divisive, you know, them, us mentality. I don't know how we pull ourselves out of that. I just, I don't. And the fact that people like yourself are starting to stand up, that, you know, people can love or hate Dr. Payne.

But like I just go back to, I look at you. I go, like, to me, I feel like you got a dream job. I feel like Dr. Payne has his dream job. I look at my life and I go like, I kept saying to myself four or five months ago, like, why now? Like, I was just, you know, I was enjoying the podcast. I was getting to interview some cool people. And people will argue now that this is cool people and everything else. But like I wasn't controversial.

I'm just doing interesting stories, right? I got to sit down with, you know, one of the guys I grew up watching was Don Cherry. So like to sit down was surreal with a guy like him or maybe a, you know, lots of people know spit and chicklets. Well, I got to sit with Paul Bessonet. Like that was wild to me. Yeah. And I kept saying inside my inner monologue like, why now?

Why now? Like, no, I don't want it. No. And the longer this goes on, I just. So it doesn't, like, we don't get to choose the time we live in. We just get to choose how we react to it. And here's where we are. We're in a situation where things do not add up.

But I got young kids. And in your mantra, I think is going to speak to a lot of parents in that, yeah, we've got to make some hard decisions. And we got to start talking about the hard issues because the longer we don't talk about the hard issues, the worse everything gets. And for too long, we haven't been talking about them. And I think we need more discussion, not less discussion. And we need the brightest of us all to continue to talk and open up some possibilities of maybe some ways we can we can start to revert the course wrong. Because the course we're on, I feel like, you know, and I apocalyptic. Yeah, doom.

Yeah. I don't want those things because that's not where I was. But if I look back on my life and the tough choices I've had to make, like here I say, it. And I don't know any other way to go about it, but to continue on the path to continue trying open up these conversations to give people like yourself a voice to to explain where you're at and why you're having a difficulty and why RC&P are being forced to do something they don't want to do, right, along with doctors and everybody else in society right now. When you mentioned we're losing our humanity, that's one of the first things I said on my very

first interview with a truth warrior. That's how I kind of began the conversation was making an appeal to people's humanity. You know, stop, present my case as to why people in my position have made the decision that we have and offer you offer you my explanation as opposed to just like the attacks that you've seen about idiotic, selfish. And, you know, when you look at the number of health care workers that are in my position and other first responders, and not just us, but I mean, you know, health care, police, fire ambulance, all of that, all those people, we, you know, whatever military personnel would be in our position, we've all chosen. we've all chosen a path that comes with a level of risk to ourselves. And I'm 100% comfortable with that.

That was the path I chose. That's the path I wanted to be. My specific career path, even within the RCMP, from General Duty to ERT, was, I wanted to be in those positions. I wanted to be the guy who responded to those calls and dealt with them. That's when I felt good about myself. That's when I felt that I was living my greatest purpose in my chosen profession was when I was doing things that were high risk.

So this is not from a position of selfishness of like, well, I only care about my health. I don't care about everybody else. Like, no, that's not the case. And I've said this before, and I'll say it again right now, if there was a product on the market that I was convinced was effective at preventing transmission, even if there were safety risks associated, I would have done it. I would have taken it if I truly believed that it would accomplish preventing spread. And therefore I wouldn't be endangering anybody else. I've been willing to take risk on my own physical safety.

And to a degree, the grind of policing your own mental well-being, that was my profession. I chose that role. No one forced me to do it. I was willing to risk all of the physical safety, the physical harm, the mental stressors. that build over time because I wanted to do something that I felt was meaningful. But I can't unknow what I have found.

And I can't, it makes no logical sense to me to risk a potential massive cardiac event for something that I don't believe prevents transmission. And beyond that, when you talk about the freedom to choose, you know, that's at the bedrock of our society. You know, you've heard people like Jordan Peterson say this. And, you know, the rights and freedoms of the individual is a, is paramount within our culture. And that's why we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That's why the Constitution is worded the way it is.

That's why all of our privacy legislation surrounding, you know, personal information, personal medical information is worded the way it is. The Canadian Human Rights Act and the different prohibited grounds of discrimination. All of those documents, all of that existing law and legislation in that country puts the rights and freedom at the individual. It's at the at the core of everything that we do. You know, um, as a police officer, one, one of the things. that they absolutely drill into you at in your at the training academy at depot and regina

and what guides every decision and action that you make whether it be investigative wise or even when you're making real-time decisions that may result in a use of force incident you know you're you always have to be aware of the charter and that you're acting with in it. And if you wander outside those boundaries, you know, you could jeopardize the investigation. The court case could be lost or you could find yourself in trouble for using a level of force that wasn't appropriate and wasn't a violation of another citizen's charter rights. You know, I think it's evident that the government knows. that they are crossing the boundary.

Like not just not just skirting it. Like they've crossed it. You know, when you hear them deliver their policy on travel, that is, I think it was specified towards domestic as opposed to international because right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,

section six, it specifies that every Canadian citizen has the right to enter, remain in, and leave Canada. So I think that's why they're trying to put, that's one more pressure tactic that they can try and circumvent the charter on with the domestic travel. I've since heard that that got pushed back the date on implementing that. I haven't confirmed that myself, but okay, you're nodding your head. It seems like it has been pushed back.

Yes. End of November. That's the new date. Yes. Okay. So they are aware of what they're doing 100%. They know that they are crossing a line. And when you read the reopening Ontario Act here in Ontario, I read it entirely,

trying to find, okay, how does this supersede the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? You know, this piece of provincial legislation as opposed to like the supreme law of every citizen in this entire country. and I couldn't find anything in there that mentioned superseding individual rights and freedoms. And I certainly did not find anything in there specifying who would enforce it. You would think that there would be a provision in that act that would identify, well, you know, perhaps it would be municipal bylaw or the police of jurisdiction. I didn't find that. It's possible I missed it, but I read it. not the entire thing twice, but I read the entire thing once and then I skimmed over it again

prior to doing these interviews. And it puts all of the onus on the business or facility manager and the individual to provide to ensure that the vaccination status is confirmed. And to me, that is just another government cop out and shucking of responsibility. So that when issues arise, they can have some. some level of plausible deniability to say, well, you know, the onus is on you. The onus is on the business owner. So they have to deal with the human rights complaint or the onus is on the individual. So that's not how our legal system works, right? If someone is charged with an

offense, the onus is on the crown to prove that that that offense was committed. And if it was in a trial setting, all that the defense has to do is create a reasonable doubt, right? They don't even have to completely prove the innocence of the defendant. They just have to create enough of a reasonable doubt to rule in favor of their defendant. So I firmly believe that this is more about compliance than it is about public health. I think that they know, sorry, I shouldn't use that terminology, they, I think the government knows that what they're doing is in contravention of our constitution and they're crossing, they're crossing, they're crossing, but the majority of the population probably

believes that it is law and that they that these mandates are lawful whereas i haven't found anything that would convince me that their their position is on firm ground um it brings up nagasei i had dr daniel nagasei on i heard his story i see him i've seen him give his speech yeah probably the most impactful i i say i don't know if i say this every time but i say this a lot And I try and explain this to a lot of people that, you know, by having you on, I don't walk away from here going, man, agree with everything Dan said, man, he was bang on. Now, in fairness, I think you're awfully bang on a lot of things. What Daniel Nagase, one of the things that he imparted on me when I think back to that interview is I asked a question of like, how do we get out of them? And he said, keep reading, keep asking questions, keep learning about science and reading about

history, something along that lines. And when I listen to you talk right now of people think it's law, and I've heard this passing the buck down to the lowest of the levels to enforce, that's exactly what I hear is that people need to be, people need to continue to do the research, listen, read, etc. because without that we will blindly follow. And I think when it comes to the government, you know, for a lot of us in Canada, I'm going to speak Canada here. For a lot of us, we like I just, I haven't thought much about it. Until I had kids, I didn't really start paying attention, right?

So I only got my oldest is five. So everybody can do the math there and understand how long I've been really paying it going like, oh, that's kind of odd. I've been to that point. I've lived a great life. Better than the majority of the population on this planet, I assume. I got to play a sport that took me around the world in hockey. It was fantastic. And, you know, there's been some things come out about hockey recently.

I mean, geez, it just seems more and more. I'm sure you know the Kyle Beach story. And just like, holy, like, I'm so thankful whatever happened in my life, never put me in situations like that. Now, I don't know. I just, I've almost lost the words at this point of like how we, how do we get through this? Is that what you're looking for? Yeah. You know, like everything you've said makes complete sense to me. Nagasei what he says is keep learning, listening, doing these things.

And when I come back to my own experiences with the government, I never. questioned it because I wasn't worried about it. But if you talk to different groups or different countries, you know, they've seen some pretty nasty stuff through the turn of time. And some are still seeing it right now. And they say you can never have blind trust in your government. And I think it's one thing in Canada. Maybe we've been fortunate enough or maybe we stood on the shoulders of some people who never blindly trusted the government ever. And now we're entering that period of time where we do. And to turn the, you know, I, I don't know if the Titanic is the right word or the right analogy, but I just feel like we're on a giant ship. It's not like having this

conversation and all of a sudden we revert course and away we go. Like we're not in a speedboat right now. We're in a giant ship that's just moving along. We think the course we've, we've steered to is the correct one. And there's a bunch of us sitting on the boat going, yeah, but look up there. Like we should probably just turn a little bit, just a little bit. We don't have to turn a crazy amount, but you can see the iceberg coming. It's going to hit us. It's going to hit us hard. And these are the problems that are going to come. And I'm no doctor. I can't, I can't say that exactly. I'm no shipmaker. I can't say that an iceberg hitting us out of a ship is going to cause irreparable damage, but I can assume that it's going to hurt. Right. And that's

where we sit. So I don't know how we get out of this other than doing this and continuing to talk about it. Well, I think, you know, from your Titanic analogy, Like you said, you're not a shipbuilder. You don't know the, it's not a, it's not a pre-necessarily a predetermined outcome. But history is a pretty good teacher. And it seems like we are committing some of the mistakes that have already happened in other parts of the world and parts of history. And I don't know how severe it will become here. I hope that we can realize when we have crossed too far of a line.

You know, I think people, I want people in Canada to know what their legal rights are. You know, different provinces have different legislation regarding protection of private, of medical information. But I think the three big ones. ones that I would suggest that people familiarize themselves with would be the Canadian Human Rights Act, even just a summary understanding of it regarding like prohibited grounds of discrimination. But you know, the number one thing that every Canadian should at least read once in

their life and have a have a basic understanding of is the Charter of Rights and freedoms. It's very clear about the fundamental freedoms that we all are. we all lawfully have in this country. And it's contained within the Constitution Act from 1982. The Charter is part of the Constitution Act. And, you know, it talks about your freedom of choice, essentially, regarding a number of things, you know, mobility and freedom of religion, etc.

It has a number of sections in there, you know, related to, everyone has the, you know, Section 12. everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual punishment. And I guess that would be open to interpretation, but like you had mentioned before, the loss of income, like the coercion to be, to feel as though you are indirectly being forced into doing something that goes against everything you believe because of fear of losing your job. I think there could be an argument to be made that that is unusual punishment in our society that has valued the freedom of the individual on so many other issues. And, you know, Section 15 is that every individual is equal is supposed to be equal under the eyes of the law.

there's nothing in there that differentiates the vaccinated from the unvaccinated. It's every individual. Probably the most important section from my perspective of the charter is section 52. And that clearly states that the constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada. And that any other act of regulation that is in contradiction to a provision of the constitution is of no, of no force or effect. So these policies in my mind are a clear contravention of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution Act. And if that's the Supreme law in this country, what are we doing?

What are we doing here? And especially considering that the evidence is weak at best to support their policymaking. decisions. And then further to that, you've probably seen it. I'm sure most of your listeners, viewers have seen it, like the Canadian report on immunization. It's a document from 1996. Like it says right in there. Like heading number one, page nine, unlike some countries, immunization cannot be made mandatory in Canada due or because of the constitution, period. That, in my mind, should be enough. Report on immunization in 1996 stated immunization is not mandatory in Canada.

It cannot be made mandatory because of the Canadian Constitution. Section 2 of the Charter guarantees these fundamental freedoms through the freedom of conscience and the freedom of thought, belief, opinion, expression. Without individuals having these freedoms to choose, we would not have the Democratic Society that we're thankful to have that we live in currently. That's correct. And if you go back a few months ago, Justin Trudeau even said that in a Zoom interview. And, you know, right now the only exemptions that they're allowing people or that they're even willing to entertain for the federal public service mandate is religious or medical.

And even that sounds like the parameters are not exactly. exactly clear. And a lot of it sounds like it might be subject to discretion of your manager, whether they sincerely believe that you have your... I had a lawyer on who talked about those two, Carol Cross, and if people are more interested, and she talked about the medical one, you know, that's, oh, like medical reasons, but it's not so clear. No.

It's more like, I think it came down, anaphylactic shock was one if you had your first dose. and there was one other and I'm forgetting right now, but basically she said, even for an exemption, it was more of like an exemption of time. Like they still wanted you to get your second dose. And a religious one, she said,

was failing more and more. Like it was becoming tougher to prove. And that in itself is almost a little bit wild to think that we've got to a point where, you know, I think that's, who are you as my manager to judge, the sincerity of my religious belief.

That's such an infringement on like your freedom ends where mine begins. Yeah. Right. And I mean, oh, what I see, what I fear most for the future of our country is like, it appears to me if you look back on the infringements on the freedom of speech, people being censored and deplatformed just for like you said legitimate people we're not talking about fringe we're talking about like legitimate experts in their field that have stood up and opposed certain policies or certain legislation because they feel that it's violating a fundamental

core pillar of our society and now we're moving into this territory of you know, restrictions of freedoms and your ability to maintain your employment based on a medical decision, a private medical decision, your bodily autonomy. What I fear is that we are slowly incrementally building

towards a more and more authoritarian form of governance. I'll just come out and say it. It seems to me like it's a push towards a more socialist, communist, type government, but by a different name, by a virtuous name, right? Yeah, it's just, we have the, you know, the government can protect us from everything. It's going to provide for everyone. It's going to, like, it can control everything. It's the idea, you know, that, you know, out west here,

We've been built on entrepreneurs, smart thinking, private business. You got a problem in front of you. You get the brightest people to think on it and solve it. Me and me and Mike Kuzmiskis just talked about this a couple days ago, right? That, you know, we're faced with some giant problems. And now we've learned about a bunch of what's going on. And now it's weird. It hides in the guise of public safety.

And how do we address this properly that we're reassured. Everybody's worried about public safety. But we open up the dialogue of how we get out of this and like how to open the door that isn't just we're throwing the door wide open and you all fend for yourselves and make it seem like, oh, they're leaving us. And all of a sudden this terror comes in that like the government doesn't care about us. It's like we can we can protect ourselves. We all have that ability.

But I'm finding we're losing the balance of those two extremes. Yes. Right? Like it's weighted really heavily that you have to be on one team or the other. It's like, well, no, I go back to what made Canada perfect or, you know, one of the, why people flocked here and wanted to be here. It's because we're a great country. We got amazing people from coast to coast. I've seen it firsthand.

I'm sure you have as well. Heck, you've been to places up north that I have not been. And I'm sure you have wild stories for a different day from up there. about the amazing people that are across all of our country, whether we're talking to provinces or the territories. But as soon as we make, I don't know, and I don't know the proper way to say it, I say this a lot lately as I'm thinking as I talk or I'm talking while I think maybe, right? Which is dangerous, but it's the way my brain thinks. But like, you know, the longer we go at this, we're starting to make the mistakes that previous. society's made and that thinking that big government can protect everyone from everything.

Well, that in itself, I mean, you don't have to go far back in our human history where that has ended very poorly over and over and over again. Just look at our, sorry, just to just look at our own country. You don't have to look any further than our own country. And in the last hundred years, we've had the, the, the First Nations, the schools, right? I'm forgetting the term. Why am I forgetting the term? Residential schools. Thank you. Why was I? I don't know why. We had the residential schools. I think we've, we've can all had our eyes open to some stories out of that.

But I mean, even go back to the war. Now, whether this was right nor wrong, they had the internment camps there of Germans and Japanese. That happened in Canada. That wasn't anywhere else. Just look here. Yeah, we're not immune to the stains of history by any means. We've, we've, we recognize that there are mistakes. And yet we're alienating people again, like different demographic. But, you know, again, creating that, that fear of the other, right? And they, they must conform to be part of our society, that, that mindset. And I think when you look back at.

previous or even current authoritarian regimes, that has been a, that's been a strategy that they have employed to come to power is that creating that fear of the other and then offering the big government protection from the other. That might be a strong statement, but like we had discussed earlier, we're not, we're continuously hitting milestones. that I never thought we would hit. And so I don't want us to continue on this path. We want our population to continue being compliant and let that line get further and further.

Well, I just recently listened to a public speech by Dr. Julie Panesse. That's the pronunciation of the name. Yes, Panassi, yes. Yeah, she's a fantastic lady. I've had her on her a couple of times. I just spoke to her on the telephone Tuesday. Yeah, she's as lovely as you. would expect. Yes. And she talks about how, or do you, are you hearing that right now?

Nope. Okay, sorry. I'm just a phone coming in through the computer phone call. But in her speech, she talks about how she mentions how she does believe that COVID-19 is, is the biggest threat to, I don't want to misquote her here, but it's either to Canada or, or, or, or, you know, or globally. I can't remember what she specified. But then she goes on to expand on that, like, but not because of the virus. Like the virus is part of it,

but it's our response to it. And, you know, she forecast that the, the future books regarding bioethics will address what we've done as a society in the history book. And she, you know, she says it's, it's a pandemic of compliance. You know, I think, I think she specifically mentions that regarding Canada because we are,

I think we are a fairly compliant people. But, you know, if you were to compare us to the United States. And I would, I would just hop in there and just say, you know, once again, it's funny how words take on weird. meanings now, like compliant people will associate with sheep and everything else. I think it should give people some pause to think like when you go back, another thing in that Pinesse speech, she was talking about Hannah, and I don't know her last name, Arendt. She was originally a German citizen. Anyway, she covered the Nuremberg trials. When she talks about it was just, you know, like everybody thinks it's this big old grand scheme of like these evil dudes.

who were sitting up there. Yeah, we're going to get everybody, right? And maybe there's a couple of those. I have no idea. She's talking about Eichmann. Yes. And it's just another regular person, you know?

And maybe Eichmann was, well, I won't sit here and speak. Eichmann did some of the most atrocious things the last century has ever seen. Anyways, I'm just saying, like, right now, we just, like, there's tons of regular, everyday people trying to navigate life. And this is a giant problem that's been thrown in front of us. and all of us just wish, you know, we could go back to talking about, I don't know, whatever. But like, people, century after century, decade after decade, we're falling into the same trap of what happened to the people before us and the people before them and the people.

Like, we all get to these places in life where you're just like, how the hell do we ever get here? Like, and that's where I'm stuck. It's just like, how the hell do you? we ever get here. And I think we got good people on all sides of this. And it's like, how do we leverage that to get out of us? You know, regarding the repetition of history. Yes. I've heard this brilliant author, very interesting guy, whether you agree with all of his theories or not, his name's Graham Hancock. Oh, yes. He refers to the human race as a species with amnesia. And that's when you were mentioning the repetition of the mistakes past,

that's what clicked into my mind. How to get out of it. Part of her speech and part of our conversation the other day was that we hope that more people are willing to stand up and speak out if they feel like something is wrong, which I'm sure there's far more people out there that they have those feelings, but they have a lot at stake in order to stand up and say it. My mom was messaging me the other day, checking in to see how we're doing and asking how people could support the Mounties for freedom. And I said, you know what, just share the message as far as you can. Share the letter. Encourage people to sign the letter. And encourage people to be brave. If you have something to say, stand up and say it. Because a lot of us, even in our

personal lives, you know, pre-COVID, you avoid confrontation with people that matter to you because you don't want to burn bridges. You don't want to damage relationships. And I'm guilty of that. I've been guilty of that the majority of my life. I have no problem confronting a violent criminal on the street, but it's hard for me to have a hard conversation with someone I love. But right now, we need people. We need people to express their displeasure about what's going on. We need to be able to speak up and be brave. And I heard Dr. Peter Markello recently say in a Zoom meeting that I was watching with him. Wasn't a direct meeting between him and I.

I was just a part of a group that was listening to him speak. And he said, we need people to be brave. And you know what? It's fun to be brave. And he's right. I was at the height of my stress and anxiety. I mean, a lot of those things are still there. Still spiraling scenarios about what I'm going to do for an income and where I'm going to live

and how that's going to affect my family and, you know, how that's going to, my future is still very uncertain. But as soon as I started to speak out, I started to feel better about myself. And the more I do it, the more steps I take, the better my days are becoming. You know, the tremors in the chest are reducing. my sleep patterns are somewhat improving you know we need we need to i don't know why that makes me emotional you talking about but yeah yeah i i've had an emotional roller coaster you know um i've confronted armed gunmen and been totally at peace with it felt good about it the other day my little boy looked at me, had a little breakdown and asked, what about my friends

when we were talking about the possibility of uprooting and moving to Western Canada to be closer to family. And it's like every day, it's like someone else in the family that's going through that. That was the first time I really heard him express that to me. I know my My daughters, they're very fiery. So they've been lashing out in anger. And I've been trying my best to be patient with them and understanding about what they're going through as well. My little boy is such a sweet kid. And that really tugged at the heart when he had his little.

That was the first time I've seen him react like that through all of this. you know, he's, this is the only home he's ever really known. You know, my oldest daughter was just over two years old when we moved here. He wasn't even a year old yet. My youngest daughter was born here. You know, so, sorry, I got a little bit off track there, but this is having a tremendous impact on people's lives. I think a lot of us can say, Dan, like, it's not just you, right? I think just by being you being a figurehead of an organization that you're part of. That is a pretty influential organization. We can both argue across Canada,

right? For you to stand up for sure puts crosshairs on your back. That's probably a terrible analogy. I don't mean that. I know what you mean. It's okay. You know, normally for what I say that, it's not such a real life scenario for an officer. But for all of us sitting here, you know, like, you know, I go back to the letter and I'm going to implore the listeners to go to

Mountiesfor Freedom.com and look at the letter. Read it. It's really well written. One of the things, the one of the things I'm staring at it right now, I've always wondered about abusive relationships. They don't make any sense to me. maybe that's because of my upbringing and having a healthy family dynamic. Maybe that's because I'm married to a woman that I just love to death and the thought of abuse of relation. I just never crossed my mind.

At least that's the way I look at it. I read this part and I'll read it out to the listener here. And it says the RCMP has taught us the importance of severity of domestic violence. Domestic violence is centered around power and control between an abuser and a victim. One of the biggest problems with domestic violence is there is often an escalation and the severity of abuse. RCP members have been taught how to have been taught how to identify the signs that someone is involved in an abuse and relationship. There are different types of abuse. The abuser uses and it may engage to keep in control over their victim.

They include physical, financial, and emotional. That goes on to talk about emotional abuse is quite complex and will often include a variety of tactics such as socially distancing the victim from friends and family, discrediting the victim so they have difficult. obtaining support from others and making the victim believe that their thoughts and beliefs are wrong to the point the victims feel like they're insane. And as soon as I read the insane thing, I don't know how many times I don't know how many times I can tell you. I've sat on this podcast and went, I don't know, maybe I'm just going insane. Right. Like, and I use that term maybe a little lightly, but just like maybe my thoughts on this and beliefs are wrong. So the important. of people like yourself, of Dr. Payne, of Dr. Andrew Liebenberg, wherever he's sitting at, of the Julie Panese, there's so many more. But here in Canada, Daniel Nagassi, you know, these people that have come on my show, I'm speaking specifically to my show, there's way more than that, as we both know. But the importance of credible people standing up and going, this is not okay by the definitions of my job which I am here to uphold you know uh doctor patient

relationship or in your case the laws in which our societies founded on is very very meaningful uh more people than you know and uh as i sit here and listen to you and understand how hard of a choice that had to have been at least in the beginning we can sit here and and justify it now is like you know, it's, it's easier and easier as it goes. But at the beginning, it's a very tough choice. I still, I have a group of guys around me and friends and family for that matter. I got a wonderful supporting cast that I've had a lot of moments where I'm just like, I don't even know what I'm doing anymore.

What am I doing? And it helps to have conversations like this, helps other people to hear conversations like this and understand not to say that we're the best. of us, but we're not the worst of us either, are struggling with the same things. That, yeah, I got a young family and the thought of losing my job is scary as hell. And what happens after that if that would ever come to fruition? I don't know. But I know that I'm not doing these things.

I'm not sitting here having these conversations out of Maleficence or trying to do bad. I'm having them out of like curiosity and genuine concern for people. people I care about and the society I live in and the community I live in and everything else that I see going on. And so I think I just here's my long rant. I just look I I look at you and I really appreciate what you're doing and standing up and having you know the courage to talk about what's bothering you knowing that disciplinary action as you've spoken of is a very very strong possibility. You know, I've got to the point where I've come to peace with the fact that I'll never do the same job that I've been doing the last eight years. I'll never do that job again. I likely won't

remain a member of the RCMP and I'm okay with that. I'm okay with starting over. I just have to solidify a plan as to what that's going to look like. I don't necessarily need that to be part of my identity anymore to be happy. You know, that, that, this last 20 months, whatever it is, has, has put that in perspective for me. I do feel like we need more. We need more people in positions like mine to stand up and to speak out. like Dr. Pinesse said, like we need 10% of the population to be vocal

and then the ideas will grow. I think, you know, right now we're all fighting our own individual battles, some legal, you know, those are all tools to use to come back from this. But I think we need some immediate action as well. I'm kind of, I can't speak for any organization here, just my own perspective.

In the conversations that I've had with others is like peaceful noncompliance is what's needed right now. If enough of the population was to push back and just say, no, you don't get to do this anymore. We are not going to alienate people. and treat other Canadians as if they are less than human or they're morally superior somehow because they did what you told them to do. We're not going to do that. We're not going to check vaccine passports. We're not going to attack each other on social media or in a face-to-face setting.

That's probably much more rare, but it has, it does happen. we're not going to arrest mothers who go to the rink to watch their kids play hockey. And if police officers say, no, I'm not enforcing these unjust laws. People, as long as people are being responsible and respectful of others, they get to enjoy the same freedoms as everybody else. If enough of us do that, the government has no power. They only maintain that power over the population through compliance and enforcement. So we've been going quite a while.

Would you like me to wrap it up? I'll give you a final. Yeah, sure. It's been a good conversation, Dan. Yeah, I've thoroughly enjoyed it. So I have this catchphrase. I don't take credit for it. it existed in my work environment for a long time.

But I like it. And it seems to be getting some traction amongst supporters of the Mounties for freedom. And that's about a line in the sand. We use that in our profession to clearly communicate to everyone what we're not willing to let the bad guy do. We want things to resolve peacefully. That's the ultimate goal. But we all have to be aware that there may be a line that's crossed where we have to take action. And I've been very clear that my line has been crossed.

So I would encourage everyone, doesn't matter who you are. Civilian law enforcement, doesn't matter. to visualize your line in the sand and visualize what you're not willing to let, what freedoms you're not willing to be taken away and to have a plan if you see that line being approached. And again, I cannot emphasize this enough. You know, peaceful noncompliance. When are you going to stand up and say enough is enough? We're not doing this anymore. You're not going to do this to me and my neighbor, my family, my friends, and you're not going to do this to my children. Think about the world you want them to grow up in.

Don't have that line in the sand etched in your mind so that you recognize it when the time comes. And all the arguments I've had with my brothers. And the best thing he ever said, this is Dustin, my brother Dustin, me and him gotten an argument one day and some things between brothers were said. But he said, you know, where's your line? And I looked at him and I said, now that is a question, a good one. And that question is hard to define because it is very different for each individual person. I mean, all of us have a line where we think.

That's a lot of internal soul searching to understand what line, because when it gets approached, you're going to have the nerves of like, was that really my line? You know, like, me, they can cross it. It's okay. I'll just,

you know, I'll carry out. But to define that line and understand what it is is a very empowering thing. Now, I've kept you here for quite some time. It's been going on. But I've got to get the final question in with Crude Master.

It's my final little segment here before I kick you off. Showed it to Heath and Tracy. the supporters of the podcast since the very beginning and man, what a ride this has been since the very beginning. I'm curious. When I bring people on,

especially for the first time, I always ask them if they were in my seat and got to do what I'm doing, who would you take for your, who would you want to pick the brain of? Specific to COVID-19? Nah. Who would you take?

Who would you want to sit down and talk with? Who do you think to provide? provide some insight into some things you're interested in or life or COVID. It don't matter to me. Jordan Peterson. What do you think you'd ask Jordan Peterson? I'm curious now. Oh, I don't know.

I've paid attention to him for quite a while. And I mean, I'll admit, I have an affection towards him being a Northern Alberta boy originally. Yeah. Something that fascinates me about him is how he is able to. to speak so clearly in our and articulate himself so eloquently from memory. You know, without, without notes, without prompt. I would, I would ask him, how did you master that? You know, I know, some people have a very strong memory.

I feel I have a fairly strong memory. But I've seen him speak live and it's, it's impressive. I saw him in Ottawa here. a few years ago when he was on his speaking tour and like it had an emotional impact on me i i'll be completely honest um i've had some dark times in my past not nothing really extreme but this this job specifically my previous uh time in the north it took its toll on me and I know a lot of members who have are carrying a lot of baggage and they they haven't taken steps to seek help or you know from a from a psychological perspective and quite often they get wrapped up in unhealthy habits as a means to cope. Luckily I that's not really I've never been a big drinker so I didn't fall into that.

but i you know speaking to a psychologist and listening to people like jordan peterson have made a humongous difference in in in who i am as a person i um you know he often says that he gets people come up to him on the street and thank him for what he's done i would be one of those people He, you know, someone like him has Well, dramatically improved my life. I wasn't going to share this because at the end of the day, um, it's irrelevant.

But, uh, in a weird way, the reason this podcast got going was because of going and seeing Jordan Peterson live and then reading his first book. Yep. And I steal my line of, you have to forgive me. I'm talking while I,

think, right? I actually haven't thought out what I'm about to say from Jordan Peterson. He said that he said that the first time I ever saw him speak in a hotel well before he was who he is now. And I thought, wow, that's cool. That he's willing to expose his inner thoughts to more people to just let it be there and see if, does that make sense? And that's a skill I've seen out of him. and that allows him to be better because he's willing to be vulnerable with his thoughts to people to see what, oh, that didn't make sense or maybe that did make sense. I don't know. And that's brilliant. It's just brilliant. Yeah, he talks about paying attention to the crowd, right? He'll try and focus on an individual person in the crowd and see their reaction. And that's how he gauges what is happening in the crowd.

that's how he gauges if what he's saying is resonating with people or if he's wandered off track. That's an incredible skill. I would love to develop that myself. But I do, you know, I was apprehensive a little bit about my very first interview regarding this. And man, overwhelming response has been just, messages, phone calls, emails of people expressing support. You know, and that's a, that has really helped. Like you said, these conversations have really helped.

Prior to all of this, when I was at the height of my anger and my stress and my resentment about this situation, I would be looking around. I almost, I almost just said, that's it. I'm just going to go do it and hope for the best. And this problem goes away. And I was trying to rationalize that to myself by looking at people in the community at work and at the rink, looking around the room and being like, am I paranoid here? Am I way over analyzing this?

I feel like these people all seem totally fine. But when I've thought about that in depth, knowing all of the information that I have come across, I feel like if I did it, that would psychologically damage me beyond repair. I would never forgive myself. You know, there's a saying out there that a hero dies only one death, whereas a coward dies a thousand.

I think if I did that, that would just destroy me psychologically. And I wouldn't forgive myself. And it would make me a toxic person. for my family and for my coworkers. So that's why I'm here. A dangerous thing is to lie to yourself. Mm-hmm.

Because once you start doing that, it'll be hard to understand what's truth anymore. That's right. I appreciate you coming on and doing this, Dan. And we might just have to have you back on to see how things you're going in the future. But I appreciate what you're doing and standing up and I wish nothing more than the best for you and yours.

And if you do end up out in the West, we'll gladly take you. Hey, man. You know what? I was going to mention, I know we have a mutual friend. Yeah. So I'd like to shout out to him. I hope we're good. I haven't spoken to him for a while.

I hope nothing I've done has upset him because I value him deeply, him and his family. and I know a lot of guys from Lloyd Minster. I played junior football for the Edmonton Wildcats. And I played with a number of, I'll call them, princes of men that I know from good old Lloyd. I love that place. My core group of friends that I went to school with that I played football with,

we really gelled with the Lloyd Minster boys. So there was a Hancock, Westgate, a Hurley, and a Cherka. Those are the last names. And they are some of the, they're great people, great people. Well, thanks again, Dan. And I'm sure a few people out there enjoyed getting a shout out right at the end if they've listened. Right on. Well, thank you very much for your time.

I really appreciate the opportunity to be here with you. and keep doing what you're doing. The world needs people like you to be doing what you're doing and giving a voice to the counter-narrative. Hey folks, thanks for joining us today. If you just stumbled on the show, please click subscribe. Then scroll to the bottom and rate and leave a review. I promise it helps.

Remember, every Monday and Wednesday, we will have a new guest sitting down to share their story. The Sean Newman podcast available for free on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and wherever else you get your podcast fix. Until next time.