Ezra Levant examines the suspicious death of Dr. Sorab Lutchmedial, a cardiac physician who died in his sleep on November 15th with no cause listed in his CBC obituary, despite his vocal pro-vaccine stance—including threats against vaccine skeptics. He contrasts this with Toronto firefighter Andrew Mason’s suspension for refusing to disclose vaccination status, calling it hypocritical after frontline workers were once celebrated as heroes. The episode ties media bias, union complicity (e.g., Unifor’s Jerry Diaz), and mandates to broader privacy erosion, questioning whether "build back better" narratives mask population control agendas linked to figures like Bill Gates. [Automatically generated summary]
In today's podcast I tell you about the unfortunate case of a cardiac physician, a bit of a hero in the community, who suddenly died in his sleep in New Brunswick at the age of 52.
And I read the lengthy obituary of him in the CBC, but they didn't say his cause of death.
They just said he died in his sleep, which is not a cause of death.
What was his cause of death?
I ask a few more questions.
I try not to be too, you know, invasive.
We don't want to speak ill of the dead, but there are questions I think we ought to ask about the death.
I'll take you through that in today's podcast.
I'll also show you a few of the good doctors' tweets.
That's one of the reasons I'd encourage you to become a subscriber to Reb News Plus.
That gives you the video version of this podcast so you can see the things I want to show you, including how healthy this doctor seemed to be.
I wonder if it was a vaccine injury.
What do you think?
Anyways, you can become a subscriber to the video version.
We call it Rebel News Plus.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe, it's eight bucks a month, and you're in.
You also get other perks like shows from Sheila Gunri, David Manseys, and Andrew Chapinos.
And the satisfaction that knowing that you're $8 a month helps keep Rebel News independent.
Alright, here's today's show.
Tonight, what if someone says he'll punch you in the face and he won't cry at your funeral, but then he dies suddenly?
It's November 15th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you don't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing it, is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I saw this obituary in the CBC absolutely glowing.
Sounds like he was a wonderful man.
Here's the story.
Headline is, St. John cardiologist and inspiring spirit dies suddenly.
Dr. Sorab Lutchmedial dedicated more than 20 years to the New Brunswick Heart Center.
He was only 52 years old, just a couple of years older than I am.
And judging by the photos of him, he was in good shape.
What on earth could have made him die so suddenly and unexpectedly?
The article doesn't actually say, which I find quite odd.
A prominent New Brunswick cardiologist has died, leaving behind a large gap in the system and the community, colleagues say.
Dr. Sorab Lutchmedial dedicated more than 20 years to the New Brunswick Heart Center and the care of patients suffering from heart disease, said a statement from the staff of the New Brunswick Heart Center.
It is with profound sadness that we report the sudden and unexpected death of a colleague, friend, father, partner, and inspiring spirit.
This statement says, Lutchmediel died Monday in his sleep at his St. John home, said Jean-François Legais, the head of cardiac surgery at the New Brunswick Heart Center.
He was 52.
Dying in your sleep is a description of when you died and I suppose what you were doing when you died, but it is not the cause of death.
Sleep is not the cause of death.
It's when you died.
What happened to make you die?
Was the CBC journalist who wrote this glowing obituary not, you know, just a little bit curious?
I mean, that is your job.
I mean, he wasn't sick.
No one saw this coming.
Here's what his friend said.
It was sudden, unexpected for all of us.
He was actually on call yesterday morning, Legaray said in an interview.
I think all of us are having a hard time just sort of grasping at the size of the loss.
We chatted with him on the weekend about plans and things we were going to do, you know, in the next few weeks, few months, from the heart center.
When someone of a certain age dies suddenly, it's often something terrible that happened.
A car accident, even a murder, or, God forbid, a suicide.
A healthy, fit man of 52, who's a doctor, is unlikely to have a deadly heart attack, and they certainly don't say that it was a heart attack.
So why the omission?
Why the mystery?
I mean, just no curiosity at all here.
I don't believe that.
I think the reporter must have been curious.
She was assigned the story, and it was quite a long story that she wrote.
She must have wondered, how did he die?
I mean, basic journalism, who, what, where, why, when?
So what's the what?
What's the how?
I simply refuse to believe that any reporter, even a crummy government reporter, like the kind who works for the CBC, would lack that curiosity.
I just don't believe it.
So it must have been left out on purpose.
Now, sometimes that happens with a suicide victim.
They don't want to embarrass the deceased or his family.
I'm pretty sure that is not the case here.
The obituary talked about how he had just returned from visiting his daughter in university in Ontario and how he's making all sorts of plans for things.
It sounds sort of upbeat about life, I think.
And in fact, I think it's fair to say he was having the time of his life.
He was one of those doctors who was obscure until 20 months ago, who then became an internet and TV celebrity by talking about the pandemic and being quoted and respected and listened to in a way that he never was before in his life.
He was internet famous, which is not quite TV famous, but it was exciting for him.
His Twitter biography is what you'd expect.
Multitasking, kick-ass, cardiac, plumber, medical research, maestro, media world neophyte and coach of all sorts, master of no sports.
He, him, is.
Of course, he had his pronouns in his biography, of course.
And let me stop for a moment to say the obvious.
Unless someone is truly evil, like Fidel Castro or Xi Jinping, I think one ought to not speak ill of the dead.
They're not here to defend themselves.
Their families and friends are in mourning.
So we hold our tongues for them, but we also hold our tongues for ourselves.
As John Donne wrote, no man is an island.
Any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind.
And yet, given the hegeography of that CBC article, given the mystery of his sudden and youthful passing, I think it is appropriate to ask a neutral question, especially to the man who talks so much about the pandemic.
Did he die from COVID?
Almost certainly not.
Okay.
Well, did he die as young men sometimes do from an injury from the vaccine itself?
I'm asking that because we know that the public health establishment counts almost anything as a COVID death because the measurement is, did you die and did you test positive for COVID within 28 days of your death?
So not did you die from COVID, but did you die with COVID?
I mean, the craziest case was like that guy who fell off a ladder and died from that, but they actually counted it as a COVID death or that disgraceful public health officer in Alberta, Dina Hinshaw, who claimed that a teenager who died from brain cancer actually died from COVID.
Imagine how gross that is.
The family was so disgusted by her, they demanded an apology, which she grudgingly gave.
Politicians like Hinshaw, they use the family's dead child as a talking point.
It's the worst.
But is it fair to ask, did he die from the vaccine?
Not to ask in a voyeuristic way, but can we know?
By God, we knew anyone in the public eye who got COVID, didn't we?
We know far fewer who actually died from it.
Do you know anyone who died from COVID?
Just answer me.
I mean, yes or no is the answer.
And by no, I mean anyone you've talked to in the last five years.
I mentioned the other day that a judge in Alberta, when sentencing Arthur Pavlovsky for contempt of court, he said, and I'm quoting from his ruling here, he said, today, virtually everybody in Alberta knows at least one person who has died from COVID.
Yeah, no, no.
There's four and a half million Albertans.
About 3,000 have died with COVID, average age 80.
So one in 1,500 people has died in the province.
Do you even know 1,500 people?
I doubt you do, if knowing means anything meaningful.
That judge, Adam Germain, is atrocious.
And he was issuing a ruling based on his own fears and paranoia, not on evidence.
It is not a fact that everyone knows someone who died.
This is not the black death.
But back to the late Dr. Lutch Medial.
He had a lot to say like this, wear your damn mask.
Okay, doctor.
We need to start calling them antibody guns and Americans will start getting lining up for vaccines.
Those stupid Americans call it guns and they'll get them.
And he said this, I think all of us would treat that unvaxed patient with respect and to the best of our abilities, but the people that convince them not to get vaccinated, I want to punch those people in the face.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's not the kind of talk I'm used to hearing from a doctor.
Violence?
That's weird.
I wonder what it was like at work if you dared to disagree with them.
Or this one from the late doctor.
The collective argument to protect those who cannot get the vaccine, who want protection, immune compromised, the very young, the homeless and disenfranchised, for those that won't get the shot for selfish reasons, whatever, I won't cry at their funeral.
Hey, by the way, what's a selfish reason?
Aren't all medical procedures about yourself?
I mean, that's how we do it, right?
Everyone makes decisions for themselves based on what's right for themselves.
It's not a group decision.
It's a personal decision.
A doctor can give advice, but each patient has the right to choose to accept it or not.
So isn't every medical decision actually selfish by nature since you decide what's best for yourself?
Isn't that what we're all supposed to be doing?
And how does my vaccine choice have anything to do with your safety?
Doesn't your vaccine protect you?
Well, that's the thing.
We're finding out that these vaccines don't in fact protect you.
Here's the vaccine billionaire Bill Gates.
You know, we didn't have vaccines that block transmission.
We got vaccines that helped you with your health, but they only slightly reduced the transmissions.
We need a new way of doing the vaccines.
We didn't get much in the way of therapeutics.
Yikes.
They don't really work as vaccines, eh?
Here's Anthony Fauci himself.
We're starting to see waning immunity against infection and waning immunity in the beginning aspect against hospitalization.
And if you look at Israel, which has always been a month to a month and a half ahead of us in the dynamics of the outbreak, in their vaccine response, and in every other element of the outbreak, they are seeing a waning of immunity, not only against infection, but against hospitalizations and to some extent death, which is starting to now involve all age groups.
It isn't just the elderly.
So they're not really vaccines.
The Johnson and Johnson one falls to just 3% effectiveness.
After six months, what even is that?
But look, it holds evil either way.
If vaccines are really great, then if you take one, then whether I take one or not doesn't really matter, right?
And if vaccines aren't great, if they don't really work at all, then if vaccines are not great, then if you take one, then whether or not I take one doesn't really matter either, does it?
For those that won't get the shot for selfish reasons, whatever, I won't cry at their funeral.
That is rough talk from a doctor, isn't it?
First, he wants to punch people in the face who disagree with him, then he won't cry at people's funeral if they don't make the decision he does.
I'm not really looking for him to cry at anyone's funeral unless you truly have an emotional connection to someone.
I think that that would be maudlin.
But he's not really talking about whether or not he would cry at some stranger's funeral.
He's really saying, I don't care if they live or die.
That's really what he means.
Because of course he wouldn't cry at their funeral.
So that is the late Dr. Saurab Luchmediel.
The CBC says he's an inspiring spirit who died suddenly.
I'm not happy that he died.
I wish he had lived.
I disagreed with him, but I don't want to punch him in the face.
I think it's fine to have an obituary about someone and not mention how nasty they were in the public square.
Obituaries can be nice.
Though that's not really news journalism as the CBC pretends it was, right?
Showing Us Freedom00:05:54
But I am still curious, aren't you?
So did he die from a vaccine injury or not?
Stay with us for more.
How can I call this show that?
To many people, socialism is just good, more fair, more equal than our ruthless system.
The word socialist, after all, is derived from society.
It suggests we're all in this together.
Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic socialist, and he almost won the Democratic nomination by promising socialist benefits.
This campaign is about moving the United States toward universal health care.
At this pro-Sanders event, his supporters carry red flags, red, because that's the color of socialism and communism.
Don't these people know history?
The Soviet Union murdered millions of people.
Well, that is one of America's most interesting and most independent journalists, John Stossel.
He's really done it all, ABC, Fox Business.
And incredibly, he will be one of our keynote guests in two days, Wednesday, November 17th, at a special town hall to talk about civil liberties and the crisis we're in.
This is a series of town halls we've had.
The first with Tucker Carlson.
The second with Glenn Beck.
The third, John Stossel.
But really, I've got to tell you, the star of the last event, I like Glenn Beck plenty.
But oh my gosh, Dr. Julie Panessi in her video from that night.
Look at this.
It's been seen nearly 200,000 times on YouTube.
And Dr. Julie joins us now via Skype from London, Ontario.
Dr. Julie, I don't know if you know that, but your speech at the last town hall is being seen just about 200,000 times on YouTube.
Did you know that?
Well, I knew it was climbing, but I didn't know we got to that number.
That's amazing.
Well, you know what?
There's a reason for that.
You have a very rare combination of heart and head.
And what I mean by that is you're logical, you're smart, you take people through the ethics of decision-making in the era of the pandemic, but you don't get dry and professorial.
You speak from the heart too.
And I think it's because of what you personally experienced.
I'm just so proud that you're the pandemic ethics scholar of the Democracy Fund.
You're going to be speaking on Wednesday night too.
Am I right?
That's right.
Well, I look forward to what you're going to say.
Is it going to be similar to your marks of the last time?
Are you going to talk about anything in particular this time?
Well, one of the things that I'm planning on talking about is you mentioned civil liberties.
So freedom and whether or not we are very good judges of whether or not we're free, whether or not it's possible to be wrong about whether or not we're free.
And so I plan to ask people in the audience how free they feel, because I think that's a really important question these days.
And, you know, questions like, how can we know if we are free?
What are some signs that our freedoms might be slipping?
And then ultimately, to be a bit hopeful, to offer some hope, what can we do if we think that they're slipping away and we want to get some traction on what we've lost and what we're losing?
Yeah.
You know, I want to throw an idea at you.
I remember when I first discovered a phrase in economics called hedonic adaptation.
I thought, what on earth does that mean?
And it was an idea where, let's say you make $50,000 at a job and you get a raise to $60,000.
That's a huge raise, 20% raise.
And if it's the best feeling in the world, and all of a sudden you can pay off some bills and you can maybe get a nicer car and go a slightly nicer vacation.
But within six months, that $60,000 a year is now your new normal.
And you can't go backwards.
And you've adapted your expectations.
That is now your baseline.
What was once luxury to you is now normal.
And the phrase I've heard for that is hedonic adaptation.
I think that that concept applies to a lot of things.
The idea that the government can tell you where you can go, when you can go, you have to put a mask on.
The idea that other people can scold you, demand you for your most private and intimate health information.
I don't know what the word would be to adapt to that.
It's the opposite of hedonic.
It would be authoritarian adaptation, that we're just used to it.
We're used to having a bouncer at every restaurant or shop.
It's really like a bouncer who asks you invasive questions.
And we're used to that now.
What else I think we're really used to is that we have lived incredibly well for a very long time in Canada.
And I'm not sure we have any sense of what it would feel like to lose many things that are incredibly important to us.
And I don't mean material things.
I don't even really mean relationships in our lives, but the things that make our lives possible from a democratic point of view, the very basic structures of society, what our relationship between ourselves as citizens and our government looks like, what our relationship with fellow citizens looks like.
Do we have obligations to other people?
And what do those look like?
I think now we're seeing that, you know, this pandemic situation is putting our feet to the fire.
Showing Us What We're Made Of00:09:22
It's showing us what we're really made of.
It's showing us how strong our democratic ties have been.
And the news isn't good.
We are not good at, you know, I mean, our government is focusing hard on molding us to shame each other, hate each other, see the other as other, ostracize each other, and perhaps the worst of all, dismiss and ignore and cancel the other.
And we are exceeding at those things miraculously.
We are A-plus students at those things.
And we need to put the brakes on for a little bit and stop and think about where our country came from, why we were the envy of the world for so long, why we should, in some sense, be shameful of our democracy and how to get it back again.
Yeah.
I mean, so many rules are published by these previously unknown, anonymous, unaccountable, perpetual, deep state public health bureaucrats.
I use the word deep state because where do they come from?
They're not going anywhere.
They seem to scoff at the idea of oversight.
In fact, you hear things like the president of Pfizer saying to criticize us ought to be criminal.
Who the hell are you?
I mean, when was the last time we had a parliamentary debate?
Like a true back and forth, differences of opinion debate in our private.
None of these things are laws.
They're all health orders, whatever that means.
They're not even emanating from the parliament.
We're in a parallel.
A parliamentary gate, a town hall, a citizens' assembly, anything.
When was the last time we had any of those things?
You know, and it's funny.
I was mentioning earlier, you know, economic success, material success.
And I think there's a numbness.
As long as you've got your Netflix or your Disney Plus at home and you can order food delivered to you at home, well, you're fine.
Those are the important things.
Are you watching the new TV show, the latest TV show, and are you eating pizza at home?
You're fine.
That other stuff, let the smart people take care of those decisions for you.
Do you think people are waking up, Dr. Julie?
I don't know.
More and more all the time, certainly.
And psychologists I've spoken with have theories about what percentage of the people are sort of on the edge.
And Julius Ruschel, the brilliant public scholar and historian, thinks that we see vaccine regret, for example, among a certain percentage of the population because when they give in and get the vaccine, their fear subsides, sort of dissolves, and then they're able to think clearly and rationally and realize that there wasn't really good reason or evidence for doing it.
So there's a certain percentage of the population that I think we are seeing feel that the government has asked too much.
They did their thing, they masked, they distanced, they got their double doses, and then they want to be let off the hook and left alone.
And they're seeing that there's a kind of betrayal on the part of the government now, and there's this sort of moving goalpost.
We're talking about third boosters.
We're not seeing discussions about an alleviation of the lockdowns.
So, is this goalpost moving, or is it invisible, or was it non-existent to begin with?
But to be quite honest with you, I think there's a very large percentage of the Canadian population that feels an incredible amount of security from our government and feels as though, as long as they comply, they will be safe, they will be protected.
It's very unclear to me what kind of historical precedent we have for that kind of trust.
And I can't even hypothesize what that might be.
I'm not imaginative enough to be able to think of past examples to show when our government earned that trust.
But I think that will be the last group to fall, if indeed it ever does fall.
There will be, I think, an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance over the coming months and years, or maybe years, when the evidence looks to be even more inconsistent with public health directives than it already has been.
You know, a good example of this: I was driving through Toronto about a week ago, and the electronic signs over the highway say something like, keep yourself safe, protect transmission, get the vaccine.
Well, the director of the CDC and even Dr. Fauci have stated that the COVID vaccines can't prevent transmission.
So, that kind of inconsistency between evidence and policy is going to create a sort of dissonance or a difficulty in reconciling these two sets of facts for some people, but not for all, I think.
You know, it's incredible.
People say, Oh, there used to be this phrase, God wins law.
Whoever invokes Nazis first loses the argument because it was a sign of desperation and ad hominem, and you're reaching for the everyone I don't like is Hitler button because you're out of ideas.
But what happens if you actually have ideas, authoritarian ideas, public health ideas, mandatory medical procedure ideas that actually the last horrific practitioner of them was Hitler?
And I refer, of course, to Dr. Joseph Mengele and the horrific experiments he did on people in the death camps.
I won't even describe them, they're too terrible even to say.
That's where we got our medical ethics code.
And to see now a government official in Austria lock down the unclean and say that they are, quote, the angels of death.
That was Dr. Mengele's nickname in the death camps.
He was the angel of death.
For an Austrian politician 80 years after Hitler, to not only impose forced medical procedures on people, but to call the victims Nazi-like, that's when you're drawing upon that word, the angel of death, is a level of gaslighting and amorality I have never in my life seen before.
And yes, that is Hitler-like.
You know what, Ezra?
We have just got to get over this idea that some examples from the past, some parts of our history are off-limits.
Because, I mean, I think the motivation, the implicit reasoning behind those who say you can't compare what's going on now to what happened, you know, with the Nazi eugenics movement or the Holocaust, you know, more generally, I think the implicit reasoning there is that, well, wait, this is a poor argument from analogy because what we're seeing happening now is just not enough like what happened then.
But for an argument from analogy to work, you need to have a sufficient number of points of comparison between the two analogs.
And I think it's in principle possible that we have that now.
We have a kind of unwilling, a sort of unknowing, compliant public.
We have nonsensical government directives that want to create their own narrative.
I mean, our mainstream journalism now wants to create a narrative and have facts fit that narrative, as opposed to creating a narrative out of the facts by following them to their logical conclusion.
I think we've been seeing that for a decade or two, or maybe three by now.
We are nothing if not informed by our past.
If we forget where we've come from, if we forget, I mean, as horrible as it is to think of, you mentioned the medical experiments of the Nazis, as horrible as it is to think of, we don't have the luxury of not having that historical moment at the forefront of our mind, the forefront of humanity's mind, with every step moving forward for the rest of eternity.
Because that reminds us, that gives us humility.
It helps us to stay on a better path, right?
And so to dismiss that argument, to say that we can't talk about the Holocaust anymore, we can't talk about not just, you know, what disturbs me about that, what disturbs me now is not that we would have some kind of authoritarian government or more specifically public health officials, but that we would have a public so compliant that we come to believe that what we are doing is good and virtuous and pure and clean.
We mentioned that kind of language in the context of the Austrian lockdown situation.
And this sort of purity culture is tied to cancel culture.
And we have done this for the whole history of humankind.
And we're not just talking about physical kinds of purity, right?
We're talking about moral, psychic kinds of purity.
And we don't want unkind, sort of unclean ideas, the wrong kinds of ideas to infiltrate and infect us.
We don't want the wrong, the dirty kinds of people.
You know, I mean, this is Jim Crow language.
And all over again, there's another analogy that nobody wants to allow.
Purity Culture Risks00:09:36
But the kind of discrimination, the kind of non-discriminate discrimination that we're seeing now is incredibly reminiscent.
And history is our ally.
If we close ourselves off to it, we don't do ourselves, our children, the future of humanity any favors.
Wow.
Well, I can hardly wait until your remarks on Wednesday.
For those who want tickets, you can go to thedemocracyfund.ca and we'll put that link below the video, thedemocracyfund.ca.
There's two ways to participate.
One is to attend in person.
It's about half an hour east of Toronto in the town of Whitby, where our last two events will be.
It's really fun to go in person just to be with normal human contact again.
But for those who can't make it or are far away, you can actually watch the whole thing.
You can get tickets to watch by Zoom from your own home.
And you can get that information at thedemocracyfund.ca.
You can buy either kind of ticket to be there in person.
I'll be there.
Dr. Julie will be there in person or join by Zoom.
And that's how John Stossel will join.
So I can hardly wait to see folks there.
Last point.
I know that you are working on a very special project and we're not ready to announce it yet.
But give folks a little teaser.
What have you been up to these last weeks?
Working very, very hard at a little book.
And, you know, this book is going to partly tell my story, how the pandemic response has impacted me.
But I think much more importantly than that, it's intended to be a conversation opener, a way to crack the narrative and open up the kind of dialogue that I think we should have seen all along.
In it, I talk about how we got here, what some of the ethical problems with the pandemic response are, and what kind of hope we can have for the future and how we can correct this misstep and set things up for a more promising future for ourselves and our children.
Well, I can hardly wait.
And when that book is ready, please come back on the show.
And I just know that so many of our viewers would love to hear about the book, would love to buy the book.
I'm one of them.
And, you know, it sounds like a great Christmas gift, too.
I just, I'm so glad you're doing that book.
And I can't wait for it to be ready.
I understand that it will be ready, in fact, for Christmas.
Is that right?
It should be.
It's been a tight, tight timeline, but lots of work, lots of thought is going into it.
I think it's really crazy.
Well, congratulations.
I look forward to seeing you on Wednesday, folks.
You can join whether or not you're in the Greater Toronto Area.
Go to thedemocracyfund.ca and get the tickets that way.
Dr. Julie, keep up the fight.
I am so proud as a Canadian to hear you say what you're saying because we need so many more people.
And the fact that your video at the last town hall has nearly 200,000 views tells me you are filling a void with a combination of smarts and empathy.
And I'm just so grateful to you.
Thank you for that.
Thanks, Ezra.
I think people are really thirsty and they should be.
It's reasonable for them to be thirsty.
And we need to offer some ideas and some ways to start thinking through the, to be honest, the mess that we're in.
Well, I know you're helping lead the way with that.
There you have it.
Dr. Julie Panetzi, the pandemic ethics scholar of the Democracy Fund, she will be one of the keynote speakers on Wednesday.
Get your tickets at thedemocracyfund.ca.
Stay with us.
More ahead.
Welcome back.
Your viewer feedback.
A viewer named Snidey, I'm guessing that's just a nickname, says, of course, the union should be grieving this gross attack on workers' rights.
That's what unions are supposed to be for.
Yeah, I mean, that's the whole idea of collective bargaining, is that by banding together, you have more strength, a bargaining strength.
If you have one boss, one factory, one Air Canada airline, and hundreds of individual staff, of course they could be picked off one at a time.
But imagine if they actually banded together and say, no, you're not going to pick on him today.
You're not going to pick on her today.
Isn't that the whole purpose of a union?
It's that one uniform guy said.
If there's no difference between what the company says and what the union says, one of them is not necessary.
Saxon Steele says, thanks, Ezra, for helping those who have been duped by their union.
Unions are being bribed by the Trudeau government, just like courts and provincial legislatures are being manipulated, all for the same global goal of build back better.
And the sauce helps reduce the global population, as stated by Gates.
I don't know if the vaccine will reduce the global population.
I don't know.
I know that there have been more vaccine injuries in the last year than all of history combined.
So I'm going to put that factual observation aside.
I don't think we know that yet.
But the point is that it is true these unions are bought off in the same way that the media is.
I mean, where has the media been the last two years?
Well, I'll tell you where it's been, cashing checks from Justin Trudeau for hundreds of millions of dollars.
You don't expect them to fight back.
Unifor run by Jerry Diaz, close ally of Justin Trudeau.
So the union bosses are captured by the government or by the corporations.
It's so odd that these words are coming out of my mouth, but how can I deny what my eyes see?
Someone with the nickname C1 Cast says, this is not an anti-vax crusade.
It is a freedom of choice crusade.
It is also freedom of choice of everything crusade, not just health care.
We have lost our personal privacy through computer, cell phone, security camera intrusions into our lives.
When you lose your privacy, you lose your freedom.
There's a lot of truth to that.
You know, the other day, the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, disappeared for almost two weeks.
There were plenty of speculations.
Did he, the last time he was seen, was when he was getting a booster shot.
So people thought, oh my God, did he have a vaccine injury?
Did he get Bell's palsy, which makes you lose the nervous control part of your face for a while?
And in the end, he did reemerge and he looked fine afterwards.
Maybe it was just temporary.
Maybe he had some personal issues he was dealing with.
But as one observer said, I don't have medical privacy from him.
I bloody well demand to know where he was.
But you see, that's the thing.
None of these things go two ways.
Well, that's our show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.
And keep fighting for freedom.
And let me leave you with an interview with a Toronto firefighter, a true hero, literally someone who would rush into a burning building to save you.
But if he's not vaxed, well, we can't have him around.
Take a look at this.
The virus has affected all of our lives.
But through it, we've seen Canadians from coast to coast to coast lend a hand, make personal sacrifices, and help others.
This is especially true for those working on the front lines of the pandemic.
They are the everyday heroes who we cheered on and hung signs in our windows for.
I've been active duty firefighter for five years.
Going on six is coming March.
As it sounds right now, I'm currently suspended without pay.
I'm not sure what I'm going to be doing to take care of my family, to do whatever I need to do to ensure that the future is secure.
Lincoln J for Rebel News here in Toronto.
Now, for the past 20 months, frontline workers have been declared heroes for their continuous work throughout the pandemic.
Those same heroes are now being put out of work for simply refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine.
I had the chance to speak with one of those frontline workers, Andrew Mason, a Toronto firefighter who has been placed on suspension without pay for not disclosing his vaccination status.
Andrew has a family to provide for and bills to pay.
He has worked without second thought through the entire pandemic and is now being left out to dry.
Have a listen to Andrew's story.
Well, I'm from Jamaica.
Moved to Canada in 2001.
Went to high school in a Western technical and commercial school.
From that point on, just got into the working field after I graduated from high school.
I had a friend of mine that introduced me to firefighting through the newspaper.
So he told me to give it a go.
So I said, you know what?
I would.
Went on to the seminar, got into it, spoke to a few guys.
They got me really interested because it was more like a brotherhood.
So I was really interested in getting some light away could feel like a close family while you're doing your work and gets you motivated, helping people and being close with the guys that you're working with at the same time.
So that's how I got into it.
Fell in love with it from that point on.
I've been active duty firefighting for five years, going on six is coming March.
With the mandatory vaccine requirements in place for Toronto Fire Services, where does this leave you?
Well, it leaves me basically hopeless because I'm not sure what I'm going to be doing to take care of my family, to do whatever I need to do to ensure that the future is secure.
As it sounds right now, I'm currently suspended without pay.