Perhaps the most ubiquitous coffee chain in Canada is Tim Hortons. It used to be good, got bought our and their fare cheeped out, but it is still a fun neutral place for us Canucks to go grab a coffee or a quick lunch with friends.
Today was such a day.
We are a family politically divided by generations and the friends we were having lunch with are a wonderful couple that is more politically aligned with our son, and have a particular hate on for President Trump and Elon Musk.
To their credit, unlike many people in that camp, they do not look down on us – rather, they engage us in a political discussion in a very amicable way, just as it should be. Just because we do not agree politically does not mean we cannot be friends – something rather lacking in many places today, so I am very grateful for that.
We were having our lunch, sitting at a table with our backs to the ordering line. And, we strode into the Elon Musk DOGE area of discussion where our friends and our son agreed, but my hubby and I defended the idea of rooting out corruption in the Administrative State.
I was even bringing in examples of the Canadian Administrative State overreach that I had witnessed first hand in one of my previous careers (I hopped around a lot – based on my needs at the time…I would start little to spend time with the kids and get suckered in deep, so I’d leave and start little again, get suckered in deep – I have boundary issues and a bit of an alpha thing going).
Re-focusing: we were talking about Musk and DOGE and what they were doing and one of our friends was expressing serious doubts about trusting Elon Musk with, well, anything.
A customer in the ordering line – just behind us – leaned in and laid in to the conversation, saying we need Musk and DOGE here in Canada because our taxpayer money was being used badly and in the wrong places. He got a bit of a push back from our friend, but, to be honest, our friend seemed rather taken aback that a complete stranger at a coffee shop would interject himself into our conversation.
And, our conversation was very civil and with no raised voices – which could not be said for, shall we call him Customer 1, C1 for ease of typing. My hubby and I were giving him silent thumbs up, but, none of us were ready for what happened next.
Another person, let’s call him Customer 2, C2. Well, C2 clearly overheard C1’s comments and took very, very loud issue with them. Including calling C1 and ‘idiot’ and a lot of rude words, to which C1 suggested to C2 that he go ‘f’ himself.
By this point, the whole coffee shop was riveted by their exchange and it looked like things might turn to fistycuffs!
Except that they were both holding Timmy’s coffee, which complicated the potential carnage. Don’t want to spill Timmy’s coffee!
In the end, there was no actual violence and though I may make light of it, it is because the potential for violence was there and very palpable.
This is in Canada.
Not the USA that is dealing with this breakdown in civility first hand.
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….
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 