Greg Hill is a 32-year veteran of the Air Force and was an airline captain. He was fired from his job, was expelled from the air force, and was forced to sell his home and move his family. He is the director of Free to Fly, Canada, and works with tens of thousands of professionals in all sectors of air transport. He denounced the loss of trust in entire sectors, in the political, scientific, and medical communities. Questions, if there were any, were silenced. In dealing with a Transport Canada doctor, he noted that participation in medical trials is not permitted when employed in the sector, and was told that the “vaccines” had been “fully approved” by Health Canada (they had not). He asked for information on adverse effects, as Health Canada had just released information about myocarditis—he received no reply.
He personally knows, first hand, of “vaccine” injuries suffered by airline colleagues in Canada, and none of their injuries have been acknowledged. No replies, to hundreds of questions from members of the public, ever came from the Minister for Transport. Transport Canada refused to answer questions pertaining to flight crew health, critical to maintenance of safety in the industry. He ended by quoting Primo Levi: “Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common men, the functionaries ready to believe and to act without asking questions”.
In response to questions from the panel, he noted that even those who were “vaccinated” cannot afford to speak out and voice their questions for fear that they will still be targeted and perhaps terminated. Given the constant non-response of the authorities, he notes that systems are already in place to deal with that problem (he did not elaborate), but what we need is for people to be ethical and be willing to lose something in the process of defending the good of the wider society—or else lose everything of value further down the line. He praised the continuous, unrelenting, courageous pressure mounted by ordinary Canadians in getting the travel mandates to be lifted/suspended. He says it is unknown whether he will ever fly again.
Sergio Molina, is a Canada Post employee, a letter carrier—on suspension—representing Posties for Freedom. At the beginning of “the pandemic” he was seized by fear of high death counts, but then started noting how little of what the media reported made sense. When the “vaccines” were rolled out, he had accumulated a lot of questions, and doubts. His preference is for holistic health, rather than pinning all hopes on a single product. He also reminded us that in Canada, “vaccines are not mandatory” under the law. He prepared a petition which he sent to his union, with about a hundred signatures, from very early on, demanding that the union do its job of defending them. The union did not. Roughly 6,000 in the postal service did not want to disclose their medical status as the rollout began, but now those numbers have dwindled to about 2-3,000. He decried the authoritarianism taking firm hold of Canada, and he noted that the freedom to make one’s own medical choices is being nullified—except when it comes to abortion (which he condemns).
As a letter carrier, he worked through the thick of “the pandemic”. Letter carriers do not get close to people, so they are hardly those putting people at risk. The union, which has a representative on Health and Safety, simply repeated the mantra that was passed down from that office, as did the corporation. On the work floor, there was name calling, insults, and discrimination over the vax issue. Canada Post is prepared to take back those on suspension, but first has to “prepare” to “receive” them, so the process is slow.
Molina did not want to use his religion to seek an exemption, because he felt it went against his conscience to do so. He should not have to disclose his status to begin with, which was and is his position.
In response to questions from the panel, he noted that the union finally decided to file a grievance, but they used someone from mainstream media who repeated the main talking points of the dominant system, and of course their grievance was defeated—in other words, the union itself betrayed its workers and deliberately engineered their loss. In the meantime, he has taken up other work, and has had significant support from his religious community.
Beau Bedard, a college teacher in Toronto, was put on leave on September 7, 2021, for not complying with mandatory “vaccination”. He told his employer he believed in informed consent, and wanted to get safety data, and pointed out that Pfizer itself said that its Phase 3 trial would not be completed for two more years. He had been teaching online, and could have continued. In fact, only two of his five courses for that semester were in person—but all his courses were taken from him. Once the provincial mandates were lifted, the employer invited him back to work—online, an option which they had previously denied to pressure him to get “vaccinated”. He is taking them to arbitration. He does not know of many colleagues who take unpaid leave. He has also taught this summer, including one course in person, and his employer demanded that he be masked while teaching. He protested that, noting that the “masks” are unsafe and deprive him of sufficient oxygen. To prove his point he contacted a dozen companies that deal with respirators to help show the level of oxygen inside his “mask”; one agreed, and the readings were alarming in terms of the high degree of CO2, and the low level of oxygen inside the “mask” as compared to the surrounding room.
The moderator, Trish Wood, asked if in an institution of higher learning if anyone investigated the science or the data behind the failed “vaccines” and the “masks,” or was it just a case of shut up an do what you’re told. He confirmed that it was the latter—thus it has been a group-think issue rather than an evidence issue.
In response to questions from the panel, he noted how his employer preferred to hire, with little advance preparation, a number of part time teachers to take his courses, and he wondered how much time they would even have had to prepare. His view is that it is likely that the education of students suffered. In the meantime, he found alternative employment—“employers are replaceable too”.
Leighton Grey is a labour lawyer in Alberta. His position is that “vaccine mandates” have nothing to do with either health or science, but are instead political. Specifically, they represent a political attack on the working class.
He currently has a case in court against Deena Hinshaw over lockdown restrictions, which he is targeting as unconstitutional. As for the working class, and mounting frustrations, the Freedom Convoy was the culmination of that reality, he explained. His firm is representing thousands of workers, both unionized and non-unionized, who are being forced to disclose statutorily protected private medical information, or forced to take questionable and intrusive tests. He identified the Prime Minister’s Office as the fountainhead of all these mandates. His firm has cases in provincial and federal courts that involve over a billion dollars in damages claims.
Within workplaces, some are targeted for treatment as inferior, dangerous beings—“the pandemic of the unvaccinated,” being one way they are stigmatized. Involuntary, unpaid leaves of absence are wrongful dismissals, he argued. The federal government further violates “unvaccinated” workers’ rights by denying Employment Insurance payments. He listed a slew of bills, codes, and statutes that have been violated by such policies. He is seeking aggravated and punitive damages for emotional, psychological, and physical harm. He still has come confidence in the legal system, despite known biases (such as those of the Chief Justice who is being challenged by a judicial complaint).
In response to questions from the moderator and the panel, he noted that “vaccine mandates” even violate the Criminal Code, as an assault, plus exposing persons to physical or psychological harm (and he cited the relevant provisions). The effect of the denial of informed consent amounts to psychological harm, to say the least. Are those who issue the mandates liable for damages caused by the “vaccines”? His answer was yes, and there is a (woefully inadequate) compensatory system which at least confirms the liability of the federal government. He says we are still in “early days” of determining the harms caused by these shots, and there is more coming. He expects class action suits will come, and that the pharmaceutical companies have probably already factored in the cost of eventually paying damages, into their calculations of net profit. On the issue of unpaid, mandated leaves of absence, he reiterated that this an orchestrated attack on the working class, and to diminish its power. The refusal of the federal and provincial governments to pay back wages, is further evidence of that deliberate malice.