Thank You
My dearest gratitude to all my readers.
Normally I “like” or respond to everyone who takes the time to comment on my articles. The only exception has been this post I published less than a week ago.
The reason being, was this wording in an order from Justice J. Taylor of the British Columbia Supreme Court.
Are substack comments, “…causing to be published any statements or content in any online forum”?
How are the thoughts of others something that I can be prohibited from being “the cause” of?
How am I supposed to stop people from talking about me (Online)?
(The sheer impossibility of this order indicates to me Justice J. Taylor is of unsound mind.)
That combined with Justice J. Taylor’s failure to provide reason or explanation for another order from November of this year (that I have not written about) makes me confident in this assertion that Justice J. Taylor has repeatedly been unreasonable.
The one thing more important to me than my own thoughts are the thoughts of others.
While I have redacted references to _____________ in 2 articles on my substack, it is entirely unreasonable and impossible for me to redact the thoughts of others. So readers rest assured that your comments stand, and the value of your thoughts in the face of unlawful and unreasonable transgressions from Justice J. Taylor, I hold very dear to my heart.
Postscript:
Here’s yet another example of Justice Taylor’s lack of legal understanding:
The whole point of “Legal Service” is that there is some form of “Witness” that is a mental note, thought or “Wit” to confirm that a message has been received. Sending an email into an inbox cannot constitute that any “Wit” or “thought” has seen the receipt of a message. e.g. a signature is proof that there was a “Wit” that received a piece of registered mail, or a “server” giving a package to an individual and being the “Wit” of the “Witness” to prove something has been received.
So if we’re counting, this is the third example of Justice J. Taylor making an unsound judgment. (The first instance which I have not written about was an instance on November 24th 2023, where Justice J. Taylor made a judgment without reason, and then failed to provide explanation 4 days post-facto. The second was his claim that it is possible to prohibit myself as a “cause” of others to publishing statemtents about me online, and the third is his irrational notion that an email without response can constitute service.)
Addendum: Looking at the big picture.
Just how long have governments known that the Covid-19 injections were a problem? Ever since animal studies were done, as we see in one example from one national government here:
https://archive.org/details/pfizer-report-japanese-government-1/page/6/mode/2up?view=theater
Thank you.
Daniel Nagase MD
All rights reserved.
Frankly speaking, the other way around can happen. There are people who read your articles and think you are bonkers (no offence) and walk away, thus not changing their minds.
The judge's claim (or rather his peculiar reasoning and order without any specifics) only serves to prove the court system has been corrupt and weaponised to manipulate and violate the individual's privacy, human rights, and freedom to choose.
You have the heart of a lion Daniel Nagase, and the mind to match it. I keep you in my prayers along with all the other brave truth tellers and truckers in this fallen land called Canada.