Making Some Changes….

Some significant changes will be coming in terms of content in the new year.

For context, this site started in the Spring of 2018, which was 7 1/2 years ago. It’s quite something to realize that it’s been creeping towards a decade. The question needs to be addressed: what next? Retire, or change direction?

The general sentiment is one of “returning to the roots”, or refocusing on topics that made the series stand out in the first place. A short list is included, though it’s more aspiration than a promise. Time and energy are real constraints lately.

1. Deep Dives Into Various Government Institutions

One of the most viewed articles to date remains this piece on how the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is in fact a de-facto branch of the World Health Organization. It gets into the creation of it, and the ad-hoc attempts to legitimate it.

A related pitch would be to cover historical revisions of various laws they enact. Firearm rights are always a contentious issue.

2. International Banking And Climate Change

A pair of schemes that are very much intertwined are banking and climate change. Although things seem to be on the wane, enormous sums of money have been stolen from the public and sent off, with no accountability. This has been covered to a degree, but there’s so much more exploitation to get into.

3. Back To Focusing On Open Border Agenda

Prior to 2020, the bulk of the content centered around open borders, and the true scale which things were happening at. There was a real disconnect to what information the public is fed, versus what is really going on. When this site originally reported in 2019 that about a million people annually were entering, it was laughed at. Now, it’s accepted wisdom.

With immigration, comes a host of new concerns. These include human smuggling and exploitation, importing foreign conflicts, groups demanding special treatment, and censorship.

As an aside, the floodgates didn’t “just open” in 2022. Statistics Canada finally decided to be more transparent in how they calculated the numbers.

4. Land Grabs Via The Courts

The Cowichan case made national news in August 2025, ruling that a large part of Richmond, B.C., belonged to a tribe living in the area. As has now been made public, significant parts of Canada are now being contested. Property rights as a concept is now in limbo for many people.

5. Delving Into The Limitations Of Modelling

This may be reaching, but there has been a desire to tackle directly the idea of computer modelling. This is where so-called experts plug a bunch of numbers into a computer, make assumptions, and spit out predictions. Those results — shoddy as they may be — are treated as fact. A lot of problems in the world would end if this junk science simply died off.

There are some other ideas on the backburner in terms of new content, subject to time limitations. One was getting back into the privacy/surveillance topic, but it may difficult to contribute without sounding crazy.

Separating Data And Articles More Formally

The details are still in the works, but the goal is to more completely separate source material from content which critiques it. The goal is better organization.

Creative Commons Licencing

The site is looking into licencing, which will still allow use, even in full without restriction. The only condition had been credit where it’s due. This is a bit of a formality, as the goal had always been to get the material out. And “Fair Dealing” has always allowed for it to be reused in transformative ways.

Court filings and legislative documents are open the the public anyway.

Converting More Content Into Video Format

People have suggested over the years to turn more of the publications here into short videos, in order to reach a wider audience. This is a valid point, and worth consideration.

Retiring: Scam Lawsuits Series

Probably the most definable topic since 2021 has been the “scam lawsuits” series that shocked much of the Freedom Movement. To sum up: millions of dollars have been wasted, while thousands of litigants saw their cases (most, if not all, valid) tossed out because of shoddy lawyering.

This is of course not to say that all of them were grifts, but a lot of questions need to be asked about some of them. Hopefully, that point has been driven home.

Lockdown measures began in 2020, and largely went away in early 2022. If people are still fundraising in 2026 or 2027 to file a Statement of Claim, perhaps their cases require a closer look.

It’s also frustrating to put up with threats of lawsuits, actual lawsuits, swatting threats, and threats to get the site shut down. All of these have happened. It seems easier to go after critics than to zealously advance interests of clients and donors.

Retiring: “HateGate” Hoax

This is the nonsense about the Emergencies Act being invoked over a meme. The flaws in this were reported extensively. While the broader topic of government run operations is a good one, this specific psy-op has run its course.

Primary Sources Is The Path Forward

An interesting perspective relayed is that there’s more to covering court cases than simply going through the documents. This is certainly true, and there’s always room for nuance and discussion. But for that to happen, we need to at least agree on what has happened so far. We can always figure out the solution afterward.

The original documents are the primary sources, and everything afterwards is secondary, or lower. In every iteration of a subject being shared, information is lost.

Going to original documents also (largely) negates the need to discuss with a lawyer or client. Sorry, not sorry. If you have all the filings, that’s what should be the focus.

Where Do Things Go From Here?

It has been said that politics makes strange bedfellows. Oddly, a similar sentiment can be shared when it comes to various outlets reporting on stories.

Back in 2021-22, it was quite revealing to see the reactions to covering the Gill-Lamba defamation case. People who identified as “freedom fighters” were angry at the lack of support they received here. It seemed that just because they spoke out against lockdowns, they should get a free pass trying to silence their critics.

A more recent example involved the situation with Universal Ostrich Farms in Edgewood, B.C. Interestingly, despite the near constant coverage received from “alternative” media outlets, court documents were rarely discussed. While there were cries of “an attack on the food supply”, the filings told a very different story. Had there been more honest and transparent reporting, this would never have gotten off the ground.

This has led (once again) to the conclusion that there can be no sides in reporting: either truth matters, or it doesn’t.

A question that commonly comes up is who someone should be following. In a perfect world, the answer is no one. Ideally, people should be driven to seek out truth and information on their own. Information has been provided on: (a) general searching; (b) FOIA requests; (c) CanLII searches; (d) Lobbying registries; and (e) Charity lookups to get started.

Perhaps this is a better answer: follow people who make it easier to do the fact checking yourself.

***It’s not necessary to become a publisher, but it doesn’t mean that one can’t at least look up things on their own. Here’s what one person did.

The hope here is to inspire people to get into their own deep dives. Is it tedious? It can be. But what can result from it?

(a) Untold truth about court cases finally gets covered
(b) Lobbyists and special interests behind legislation get exposed
(c) Money thought to have disappeared gets tracked
(d) “Organic” movements exposed as either initiated by, or infiltrated by authorities
(e) More complete stories are told about what’s happening in the world

It’s easy to get frustrated or burned out, and to want to give up. And there’s often the comment that “nothing will ever come of it”. Until and unless something is tried, it will always be nothing. Hopefully, this will be inspiring to some.

As always, feedback is encouraged.

Happy new year to all!