private property should be protected by private individuals – not the government
remove immunity from government agents to grope us and take x-rays of us: if an ordinary citizen does not have the right to do something, then the government does not have that right either
the duty of the government is to protect our rights – not to abuse them in the name of safety
buying an airplane ticket does not mean you are relinquishing your rights
He also points out something I have said in comments to other blogs, though not blogged here: putting a loaded gun into the cockpit has been much more effective at curtailing air-terrorism than all the airport procedures put together!
(OK – I’ve gone further in my comments on other blogs, if not here: if every adult passenger were required to be certified in the use of firearms and carried a loaded gun on the airplane, we would not only be much safer, we would also be empowered to protect us and our families instead of being treated like cattle waiting for slaughter, hoping it’ll happen later rather than sooner! It’s about time we started accepting the responsibility for our own safety instead of hoping someone else will do it for us .)
When a citizen of a ‘Western Democracy’ wishes to travel from one point to another, they are supposed to be ‘free’ to do so. They are not to be hindered by any government actions.
This is all about that ‘freedom of movement’ thingy…..one of them pesky ‘innate’ human rights!
Now, if a said person contracts someone (a person or company) to facilitate his/her travel, it is a private contract between a free citizen and either another free citizen or, more frequently, a company. Let’s call it ‘a concern’…
Like, say, a concern that runs taxis, buses, horse-dawn carriages, trains or airplanes from one city to another – within the city or without, within the country or internationally. (A government has the jurisdiction to control who crosses the border, but not how ‘free citizens’ travel within them….)
Therefore, said contract is a private, civil business transaction between a free citizen and a private concern.
Since the citizen has the right to freedom of movement, any and all security measures are strictly a matter of the contract between the free citizen and the private concern which is providing said transportation service.
Therefore, in my never-humble-opinion, any security involved in a private individual contracting a private concert to transport them, is a matter strictly between the two contracting parties. A strictly ‘civil’ matter!
Yet, somehow, we have permitted ‘government’ to play that role!
How could, in a truly free society, any such government regulation be permitted, much less legislated?!?!?
And from what I read and hear, the government is now dictating the terms of all air travel, forcing private citizens to either submit to scanners which render photographic-level images of the citizens’ nude form (which, of course, also reveal a huge amount of bio-graphic data which can – and likely will – be used to identify that person in the future) – or submit to a ‘pat down’ which, in any other situation, would be grounds for charging the government agent performing said ‘pat down’ with sexual assault!
Of course, if we submit to this treatment – guilty until proven innocent – during air travel, it WILL spread to other venues…using the same justification: security above freedom!
Admission – I do not often listen to Alex Jones; sometimes, he is a bit ‘out there’. But, there are instances where the ‘outliers’ truly are the proverbial ‘canaries in the coal-mines’. So, I invite you to listen to his interview of a woman who was traveling with her children and all of whom (including the very young children) were subjected to having their genitals probed in a highly intrusive manner:
(Caution: this is disturbing and graphic description of what, under any reasonable circumstances, would be described as sexual assault of a woman AND her children – the interview starts a few minutes into the video)
This is more intrusive than what used to happen in the slave markets!!!
Yes, you would be naked and exposed – no more than the ‘naked scanner’ machines do now – but at least, in slave markets, the buyers were not permitted to touch your genitals out in the open…..and nobody was permitted to store the biometric data gained from the ‘naked body scans’!!!
And THAT just involves ‘VOLUNTARY’ examinations: the ones you permit yourself to be subjected to in order to be permitted – by your government – to exercise your innate freedom of movement, as agreed to in a private contract between yourself and a non-government controlled private individual/company!!!
I simply do not understand why this is acceptable.
Why do we permit our governments to pass laws which permit them such intrusive regulation of our freedom of movement?!?!
An ‘airline ticket’ is a private, civil contract!
It is the business of the airline to provide the security sweeps of the people who contracted them for transport.
If one private company’s security checks are more intrusive than another’s, it will be a matter of private contract made at the time the services of the transport company were contracted.
Companies whose security measures were ineffective would soon loose their customers.
Ditto for companies whose security measures were way too intrusive.
But, throughout it all, the customers would have a choice: do I choose to travel with company A, whose civil contract does permit the performance of highly intrusive security checks before permitting their customers entry onto aircraft….and who, presumably, offers greater ‘security’, or do I choose to travel with company B, who does no real security checks at all? Or, do I choose company C, who is somewhere in-between?
Either way, it is the customer’s choice to enter into a private contract which specifies the level of inspection/security one is both ‘subjected to’ and ‘protected by’.
And, it is a part of a civil contract!
It is, in no way-shape-or-form, the government’s business!!!
So, why do we permit the government and its agents to be the ones who not only perform all security scans, but also have jurisdiction over who is or is not permitted to exercise his or her rights to freedom of travel?
To collect and store all this data about us?
Why do we permit our governments to regulate a whole industry which permits us to exercise one of our core human rights?
How did we ever permit governments to usurp this level of control over us?
Leto was right: a population which walks is easier to control!
Not a single terrorist has been caught through any of these ‘security measures’: so, what is their actual purpose?
Truly, do think about it…..and ask yourself: Why do we permit this?
…
If you figure it out, please, let me know: I sure cannot see any reason for all this beyond conditioning us towards ‘general acceptance’ of greater and greater oppression….of normalizing greater and greater infringements on our freedoms!
Of course, this type of ‘surveillance’ is not limited to airports: we now have disguised vans roaming our streets, taking x-ray images of everything they encounter: the dose of x-ray radiation we unknowingly receive, we are assured, is no greater that that received during a routine x-ray….
UPDATE: the pressure is working – Sakineh had not been executed, YET. However, this is, at best, a tentative pause – to see if the international attention will die down… So, keep up the good work and don’t forget about Sakineh and her plight!
Remember Sakineh – the Kurdish woman who was tried for being an accomplice in her husband’s murder, and found innocent?
Yes, she was found innocent, even though the trial was held in a language she did not speak…
The Iranian regime did not wish to let her go. Innocent of murder? No problem – they charged her with adultery and sentenced her to be stoned for that, instead!
Worldwide outcry went up – and Iran said that, perhaps, they might not stone her….they might just execute her in another way.
Now, they have set the date for this execution: November 3rd, 2010
Here is the full text of the email I have received today from Maryam Namazie – the woman who is tirelessly working to help Sakineh:
ACT NOW
PLEASE NOTE: WE WILL BE GATHERING AT THE EMBASSY OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN IN PARIS AT 2PM (4 Avenue d’Iéna 75116 Paris) AND MARCHING TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT IN BRUSSELS. JOIN US. WE MUST SAVE SAKINEH’S LIFE AND SECURE HER FREEDOM AND THAT OF HER SON, LAWYER AND THE TWO GERMAN JOURNALISTS. AND WE MUST END STONING NOW!
According to news received by the International Committee against Stoning and International Committee against Execution on 1 November 2010, the authorities in Tehran have given the go ahead to Tabriz prison for the execution of Iran stoning case Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. It has been reported that she is to be executed this Wednesday 3 November.
We had previously reported that the casefile regarding the murder case of Ms Ashtiani’s husband had been seized from her lawyer’s office, Houtan Kian, and found missing from the prosecutor’s Oskoo branch office so as to stitch Ms Ashtiani up with trumped up murder charges. [Another man has already served a prison sentence and is now free for her husband’s murder.] Ms Ashtiani’s son, Sajjad Ghaderzadeh, and her lawyer, Houtan Kian, have warned of the regime’s plan to do so on many occasions. With the arrest of Ms Ashtiani’s son and lawyer on 10 October and her not having had any visitation rights since 11 August and after fabricating a new case against her, the “Human Rights Commission” of the regime has announced that: ‘according to the existing evidence, her guilt has been confirmed.’ In fact, the regime has created a new scenario in order to expedite her execution.
In other news, Sajjad Ghaderzadeh and Houtan Kian have been severely tortured in order to obtain confessions against Sakineh and themselves since their arrests on 10 October along with two German journalists. The initial interrogations by the Ministry of Intelligence have now been completed and the casefile sent to the National Prosecutor General and Judiciary Spokesperson, Mohsen-Ejehi, in Tehran rather than being handled in Tabriz. Their families are concerned for their wellbeing. When attempting to secure lawyers for the two, authorities have said that the two men did not need legal representation.
Sajjad and Houtan Kian’s only ‘crime’ has been to defend Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani and proclaim her innocence with facts and evidence. That their contact with Mina Ahadi is considered a crime is absurd given that Ahadi has been contacted by death row prisoners and their families and lawyers for many years now, including directly from prison. This is because of her many years of work against stoning and executions.
The International Committees against Stoning and Execution call on international bodies and the people of the world to come out in full force against the state-sponsored murder of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Ms Ashtiani, Sajjad Ghaderzadeh, Houtan Kian and the two German journalists must be immediately and unconditionally released.
ACT NOW!
1. Contact government officials, MPs, MEPs, and the UN asking them to intervene urgently. Governments must immediately summon the Islamic Republic of Iran’s ambassadors and demand that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani’s execution be stopped and that she along with her son, Sajjad Ghaderzadeh, and lawyer, Houtan Kian, and the two German journalists be immediately released.
2. Send letters of condemnation to the Islamic regime of Iran right away:
Head of the Judiciary
Sadeqh Larijani
Howzeh Riyasat-e Qoveh Qazaiyeh (Office of the Head of the Judiciary)
Pasteur St., Vali Asr Ave., south of Serah-e Jomhouri
3. Please urgently donate to the Save Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani campaign by making your cheque payable to ‘Count Me In – Iran’ and sending it to BM Box 6754, London WC1N 3XX, UK. You can also pay via Paypal (http://countmein-iran.com/donate.html).
It keeps baffling me just how many people are either unable or unwilling to grasp the difference between ‘not believing something’ and ‘believing in something else’.
A non-deity centered example of this would be, say, the question: do you believe that my mother has ‘naturally blond hair’?
Never having met my mother – and therefore not holding an opinion on the topic of her hair colour – seems the most obvious and logical position.
Yet, to have some people explain it, not having any opinion on the topic either way somehow implies a belief that her hair is NOT naturally blond – or even that it is ‘naturally red’!
Like Pat Condell, I find the suggestion that a ‘belief’ should be treated with respect similar to or greater than ‘fact-based reality’ actively offensive! Whether that belief is religious or secular, it is a belief – a notion (perhaps deeply held, but a notion none-the-less). It must never be afforded the level of respect that the anti-blasphemy movements demand.
No, I will not deny them the right to believe whatever they want to. It is their right to believe whatever they wish.
But it is NOT their right to demand that I, you, or anyone else respects their beliefs and goes around pretending that just because they believe something, we must all behave as it it were true!
Yet that is exactly what the UN’s new anti-blasphemy laws demand…
Now, couple the religious beliefs with political ambitions and you have a recipe for oppression – of the worst kind.
“While working as developer in Canada, Saeed designed a program that would allow his clients to upload pictures, and as is a common courtesy in programming, included his name and info in the file. This program, Saeed’s wife – Dr. Fatimeh Eftekhari – explains, was used in an adult content website WITHOUT Saeed’s knowledge or approval. “The only recognizable name in the program was Saeed’s,” she continued, “which led to his arrest” and to the accusations claiming that Saeed was responsible for the development and administration of the website.” from http://united4iran.org/2010/10/the-case-of-saeed-malekpour-web-developer-jailed-since-2008/
Today, there was a protest at Jim Watson’s election office. I was there, taking photos.
(And, yes – they even let me say a few words….but I was so nervous, having NEVER spoken in public before, I covered barely a quarter of the stuff I prepared. Some people took videos – I’ll post them when I see them.) As always, the ladies organizing the rally were there (and I DO use the term ‘ladies’ in the best sense).
Debbie Jodoin:
Shirley Mosley used puppets to illustrate how Mr. McGuinty’s puppet, Mr. Watson, hippety-hoppeties from Municipal to Provincial to Municipal politics:
Ruth Parent, a behind-the-scenes helper to Debbie and Shirley during these protests also said a few words:
And, ‘Debbie’s sound guy’ – who has a YouTube channel called ‘TheUnsustainableTaxpayer’ where he uploads the videos from the protest, also spoke passionately:
Despite technical difficulties, Sam also spoke:
A very pleasant surprise was that ‘Calculus’ (as he is known on this blog) came and said hello (our first real-life meeting ever): Suzanne from BigBlueWave also said hi to me: when her video is up, I’ll post it! And, of course, there were many ‘disgruntled citizens’, exercising their freedom:
As usual, if you want any of these (or of the 200 or so other pictures I took) in higher resolution, comment and I will contact you with the pictures requested.
This is a blogger’s nightmare: an anonymous, uninformative letter tells you ‘somebody’ complained about ‘something’ on your blog, so your provider froze it and locked you out….
No info on what the offending material was…
No means to remove it…
It’s a blogging version of that creek and lack of paddles…
Luckily, Binks is back!
Read about his struggle – and the still ongoing battle others are engaged in. It is informative. There are whole companies ‘out there’ making a living by harassing bloggers…
(FYI – This is why most bloggers start out anonymously. Unlike journalists, we do not have any employer to shield us from harassment, lawfare, or worse. Only after a blogger develops a regular readership and the online support network that goes with it do we dare reveal our real-life names.)
First of all, I would like to thank this soldier – both for what he is doing for all of us in Afghanistan, putting himself in danger tto keep us and our kids are safe, and for taking time to write to Dalton McGuinty’s EA and asking for an explanation of how ‘freedom of speech and assembly’ became ‘privileges’.
Now, to explain…
There has been a series of recent protests against Dalton McGuinty, the Premier of Ontario, organized by two Ottawa taxpayers, Debbie Jodoin and Shirley Mosley. Ms. Jodoin is so upset with Mr. McGuinty’s policies, she has decided to seek a nomination for the Conservative Party to run against Mr. McGuinty, in his riding, during next year’s Provincial election.
The protests have attracted some attention – and Mr. McGuinty’s ‘office’ began subtle intimidation tactics against the demonstration organizers, especially Ms. Jodoin. This culminated in a letter Mr. McGuinty’s Exacutive Assistant, John Fraser, had written and emailed to Ms. Jodoin.
Not only did Mr. Fraser see fit to email it to Ms. Jodoin at work, he also emailed it to each and every one of her co-workers – and her boss. In the email, Mr. Fraser admonishes Ms. Jodoin not to forget to obey the laws…. Yeah, employer’s just LOVE to get emails addressed to their employees which imply that without a ‘friendly reminder’ from the office of the Premier, this employee could not be counted on to obey the law of the land!
If the intimidation were not enough, Mr. Fraser’s letter (officially sent as coming from the Premier’s office) also included the following phrase:
“I think we can agree that free speech and the right to assemble are both a privilege and a cornerstone of our democracy.”
With Ms. Jodoin’s permission, I posted the full letter, along with the context (Mr. Fraser thought it necessary to come up to Ms. Jodoin just prior to the demonstration and ensure she agrees to follow the laws – the Ottawa Police were there in force, and even brought along a paddy-vagon…you know, just in case!)
Well, a few other blogs picked up on this, thanks to a great deal to MooseAnd Squirrel, BlazingCatfur and all the rest of the bloggers who picked up the story. The story made it around the world. Yesterday, BlazingCatfur posted a letter which a soldier, serving in Afghanistan as a member of Canadian Armed Forces, had sent to Mr. Fraser in response to the Jodoin letter.
He writes:
“One can not even imagine the sheer delight, as I try in many ways to convey to my troops that free speech and the right to assemble are a privilege.”
Read the full letter here.
And, if I ever have the honour to shake this person’s hand, the beverages will be on me!
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 