As IF Times

link:  Toronto restaurant owner arrested for breaking COVID-19 restrictions – OHS Canada MagazineOHS Canada Magazine

The fundamental foundation of democratic, “western” nations is the principle of “freedom” for their citizens.  In fact, apart from the economic benefits associated with “freedom” the presumed liberty to live in an open and non-restrictive society is attractive in its own right.  Were this not true, there would not be restrictions against people trying to get into these desirable societies and instead, we’d see massive movement to less open nations.

In the United States, a formal legal document which should supersede all other subsequent political edicts is known as the US Bill Of Rights which is an addendum to the US Constitution.  This hallowed document enshrines the rights and privileges of its citizens and therefore all laws created by legislators must adhere to their sacrosanct tenets.  More importantly, these rights make clear the limitations that governments have on the people.

Not to be outdone, Canada has a similar document, The Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms enshrined to much fanfare ( and controversy) in 1982.   The oldest of such declarations is probably the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of The Citizen, penned in 1789.  These documents essentially address similar issues for their citizens: specifically the restrictions of government upon people’s daily lives.

It’s probably no coincidence that an entire industry has blossomed in these nations like mold in a communal shower, to address and translate the meaning of these documents, namely lawyers.

When nations use these declarations as their guide, citizens should be confident that no subsequent edicts can be imposed that changes or suspends those guarantees without proper process.  These are the fonts from which all laws governing citizens can be derived.  It’s like the law of gravity; you can’t just suspend it because you feel like going cliff diving. There can be no capriciousness in the execution of laws which contravenes the foundation document.

And yet…the disregard for these rights have never been more egregious than what we see today as governments at all levels impose tyrannical ( not hyperbole) restrictions on their citizens in the absence of a critical national emergency such as for example, war or invasion.  The fact is, most people are about as political as border collies: they are indifferent to the machinations of politicians and lawyers since they have daily lives to lead. But the recent events worldwide have brought to light the importance of having basic inalienable rights.

The expected and supposed guardians of the rights enshrined in the top legal documents of the land are conspicuously absent as the principles are increasingly ignored.  There should be loud and indignant protests from the learned legal community, academics and constitutional scholars on the legality of the measures taken by all governments during this past year of ‘pandemic’ control.

Instead, the challenge has been taken up by a very few brave individuals such as the man in the linked story, who are willing to call out the government for their inappropriate response to an issue which has not been fully statistically proven as harmful.  Debate and discourse on the merits of government action have been suppressed by a compliant media, whose very existence should be to question government policies.  As an example of this, a recent “news” story by one of the largest media outlets in Canada ran a sensationalist headline: It read “BC records deadliest day of pandemic as total cases top 40,000”.  Characterizing “deadly” with infections is disingenuous at least and propaganda at worst.  There are not 40,000 people dying, they only claim 40,000 infections…a statistic which is likely debatable.  Slanted media has always been a nuisance, but now they’ve become a menace to innocent society. At the same time, this same news outlet reports on the tragic personal story of a woman’s father who died at….97.  Ninety seven.

There are hints that pushback is beginning to emerge.  As of an hour ago, the Hudson’s Bay company is suing the Ontario Ford government over the lockdown edict.  Also, hot off the press in the United States, the US Supreme court has just unanimously ruled that citizens can sue their governments for violating individual rights.  Note, unanimously. 

We may yet see the end of this tyrannical nightmare imposed against people by overreaching governments.  The only downside is that lawyers will win again.

link: Weekend chat: Vancouver Canucks anthem singer fired for anti-maskism – Pension Plan Puppets

There’s an old joke about a man who goes on a tour of a restaurant’s kitchen.  He notices two large pots boiling vigorously, one had a lid, the other did not.  Naturally, he asked the chef what was in the pots and why only one of the pots had a lid on it.

The chef explained that the pots were for lobsters, one for American lobsters and the other one for Canadian lobsters.  When he asked why only one pot had a lid, the chef explained that the one with a lid were for American lobsters which would always try to escape.  The Canadian pot didn’t need a lid because any escape attempts were stopped by the other lobsters pulling him back in.

This funny but ironically accurate parable describes very much the world today and it’s not just Canada that’s being skewered.  As the link above describes, the long-time singer of the national anthem at Vancouver Canucks games, Mark Connelly, was summarily dismissed over his participation in an event protesting the oppressive mask and lockdown regime in Vancouver, but which is also standard throughout the knee jerk world.  When the very basic right of free speech is trampled on by your own community, we are indeed boiling in an uncovered pot.

Apparently, the font of all knowledge has been funneled into the hands of a select few in government service and any variance from this body of knowledge shall not be tolerated by those without benefit of such wisdom.  Even worse, the supposed guardians of free and skeptical discourse, namely the public media, are instead propagandists for official government policy. It’s a very brave individual who can stand up and question the edicts imposed on free citizens and then have to endure the public chastising, or in Mr. Donnelly’s case, dismissal from his positon for expressing an opposing opinion.  There are hints of some areas going full Mao with people in government suggesting children should fink on their parents for non-compliance to tyrannical rules.

The world has now moved into the 11^th month of a ‘pandemic’ that was supposed to be tamed by a 14 day quarantine period and herd immunity.  Even as mortality statistics do not support the massive damage done to societies and economies, we are asked to prepare for another wave.  I guess the first wave didn’t show up, so maybe the second one will be more obvious.  If that doesn’t materialize, there’s always number 3.  Even worse are the the pleas by regularly paid government workers that ‘we are in this together’ when clearly there are some animals more equal than others.

It’s not as if factual statistics can justify the drastic harm done to the public, because they don’t.  Not a day goes by without the trotting out in somber tones of further ‘cases’, designed to support the ongoing narrative of a rampant disease combining the worst of ebola, smallpox and projectile diarrhea.  The naive public cowers at such horror. What is never disclosed are actual mortality rates.

The CTV news network broadcasted a report that revealed that of the almost 11,000 deaths in Canada attributable to Covid, all but 166 took place in long term care facilities in Ontario and Quebec.  More detailed statistics can be seen here.  So in light of these FACTS, does it make sense to encumber the rest of society with restrictions that do immeasurable harm to the 99% of people who are not at risk?

Well you’d better not ask that question because they’ll pull you back into the boiling water.