Tories on e-snooping: ‘Stand with us or with the child pornographers’

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83



Tories on e-snooping: ‘Stand with us or with the child pornographers’

Canada’s privacy commissioners will be surprised to hear it, but the Conservatives are accusing anyone who opposes their bill to give police new powers to monitor the Internet of supporting child pornography.

A similar comment might have cost Stephen Harper the 2004 election. But with the next election years away, it’s hard to know whether or when Public Safety Minister Vic Toews will change his tune.

Mr. Toews will introduce Lawful Access legislation, as it is commonly called, into the House of Commons Tuesday. Previous versions of the bill failed to make it through minority parliaments, but now that the Conservatives have a majority it is almost certain to pass.

The bill will require Internet service providers to store and to make available to the government and police forces information on the Internet activity of their customers.

Police will require a warrant to obtain that information. But the bill would also permit them to obtain IP addresses (which identifies someone on the Internet), email addresses, mobile phone numbers and other information without any warrant.

Ann Cavoukian, Ontario’s privacy watchdog, is fiercely opposed to the legislation, which she calls “surveillance by design.” Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart and other provincial privacy commissioners have also raised concerns.

But when Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia attacked the Conservatives for “preparing to read Canadians' emails and track their movements through cellphone signals” – which does appear to be a severe distortion of the bill’s powers – Mr. Toews’s counterattack was fierce.

“As technology evolves, many criminal activities, such as the distribution of child pornography, become much easier,” he told the House. “We are proposing to bring measures to bring our laws into the 21st century and to provide police with the lawful tools that they need.

“He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”

During the 2004 election campaign, the Conservatives issued and then quickly withdrew a press release suggesting then-prime minister Paul Martin supports child pornography because his government wasn’t, in the eyes of Conservatives, sufficiently tough on crime.

When confronted by reporters, Mr. Harper refused to back down. “I'm not going to, in any way, give the Liberal Party any break in its record on child pornography,” the Conservative Leader maintained. “It is disgraceful, they have had multiple opportunities to do something about it, and they have refused.”

Mr. Martin leapt at the gaffe. “Look, this is personal. I am a father and I am a husband, and he has crossed the line. He should apologize,” he maintained. Many observers credit the exchange with a last-minute surge that returned the Liberals to office in a minority government.

Now, it would appear, the Conservatives are once again lumping opponents of their law-and-order program in with pedophiles and pornographers.

Ms. Stoddart and Ms. Cavoukian have indicated they will wait to see the legislation Tuesday before offering comment.

Tories on e-snooping: Stand with us or with the child pornographers - The Globe and Mail
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
I am not overly keen on giving them all this power to view people's online activities, but that does not mean I support child pornography. Why do politicians always seem to put their feet in their mouths?
 
Last edited:

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
Dear Mr Toews:

Please go fukify yourself. You should be ashamed of this idiocy, this 'you're either in full agreement with this idiotic measure, or you support child pornography' ****. Anyone with a half a brain (which therefore means anyone not sitting in government) knows that this is a stupid comment from a moronic collection of assholes. That **** might play well on Sun media television, when they're not sucking you off for government grants, but really, shut the fuk up.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Dear Mr Toews:

Please go fukify yourself. You should be ashamed of this idiocy, this 'you're either in full agreement with this idiotic measure, or you support child pornography' ****. Anyone with a half a brain (which therefore means anyone not sitting in government) knows that this is a stupid comment from a moronic collection of assholes. That **** might play well on Sun media television, when they're not sucking you off for government grants, but really, shut the fuk up.

While I don't necessarily agree with the tone of your post, I agree with the sentiment of it.:)
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Dear Mr Toews:

Please go fukify yourself. You should be ashamed of this idiocy, this 'you're either in full agreement with this idiotic measure, or you support child pornography' ****. Anyone with a half a brain (which therefore means anyone not sitting in government) knows that this is a stupid comment from a moronic collection of assholes. That **** might play well on Sun media television, when they're not sucking you off for government grants, but really, shut the fuk up.




:)

Seriously - they're trying to defend this bill, but it's full of holes, much like the omnibus crime bill. This government needs to accept the bit of criticism it gets and just change up the policy.

No one will think worse of them for it.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
I won't even say, 'you're either in agreement with me, or you're in agreement with the Nazis'.

LOL!

I'm all for making it tougher on criminals, but creating draconian measures rarely ends well for the regular folk.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Last week he said he`d allow torture, this week people who want privacy support child pornographers. Whats next week, Vic?
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Last week he said he`d allow torture, this week people who want privacy support child pornographers. Whats next week, Vic?

In principle, I would actually agree with the torture mandate but only in the event that it could be objectively confirmed that torture was absolutely necessary to save innocent lives. The party who committed to torture would have to endure immense scrutiny and be uncompromisingly responsible to uphold the onus of proof as such in that case.

But getting back to the fun, let's not forget Rob Nicholson's comment on allowing people to buck warning shots on supposed intruders and some no-name MPs comment about the gun registry as synonymous with Nazism. Oh.. and Baird's Nazi comment was fun as well.

Here in T.O. we regularly enjoy the Conservatives comparing other MPs to Stalin and Hitler, so I guess it comes with the territory.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Is G.W. Bush writing this guy's stuff. "You're with us or you're with the terrorists". What
get's me is that he thought nobody would notice. I would say Toews will soon be on the outside
looking in.......where he should be...:roll:
 

Serryah

Executive Branch Member
Dec 3, 2008
8,981
2,075
113
New Brunswick
Why is it, that ever since Bush did his "you're either with us or with the terrorist" speech, everything is now a "you're either with us or with _______!"

People, that statement was not one of Bush's greatest moments! Stop using it!
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
Question: How many NDP voters does it take to aggree with an anti Harper/ Concervative Copy&Paste????

Answer: How many sheeple do we have in Canada..8O
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Why is it, that ever since Bush did his "you're either with us or with the terrorist" speech, everything is now a "you're either with us or with _______!"

People, that statement was not one of Bush's greatest moments! Stop using it!

Sez who? Calling attention to political stupidity is never a bad thing. Toews deserved
to get called on that blunder.
Did Bush ever have a "great" moment???
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Strong words coming from NP...

Jesse Kline: Lawful access bill set to become the new gun registry

For years, small-c conservatives have been arguing that the gun registry is a giant waste of money — not only because it went way over budget, but due to the fact that it serves to make criminals out of law abiding firearms owners. Meanwhile, those intent on committing crimes easily escape its grip. To their credit, the federal Tories are in the process of scrapping the registry. But while the government restores some of our freedoms with one hand, it simultaneously takes them away with the other.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has placed the Conservatives’ so-called “lawful access” legislation — which they’ve been trying to pass since 2009 — on the House of Commons Order Paper. If it becomes law, the bill will give the government unprecedented access to Canadians’ online activities, by allowing police to collect the personal information of Internet users — including names, addresses and phone numbers — without having to go through the cumbersome process of obtaining a warrant beforehand.

In order to gain access to these intimate details, the government will force Internet service providers to install costly monitoring equipment on their networks. Taxpayers will likely be forced to foot part of the bill, but the rest of the cost will be borne by private industry. Smaller providers could be driven out of what is already an uncompetitive market. The law would also make it much easier for police to force telecommunication companies to retain information on their customers and to enable tracking devices on mobile phones.

This type of legislation brings us one step closer to George Orwell’s dystopian vision of a totalitarian state that keeps its citizens under constant surveillance. Yet there is no evidence the new law will achieve its public policy objectives.

Law enforcement agencies have been unable to come up with a single investigation that has been hampered by the limits of the laws currently on the books. Even the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police could not find a “sufficient quantity of credible examples” to support the additional powers the lawful access legislation would grant them, according to a series of internal e-mails obtained by the Vancouver-based group Open Media. Postmedia News has also obtained government documents, in which officials from within Public Safety Canada object to some of the key arguments the Minister has used to justify the bill.

The other problem with the legislation is that tech-savvy Internet users already have a whole host of technologies for evading censorship at their disposal. Software that encrypts and anonymizes Internet traffic — and allows people to gain access to hidden networks — is already in use by those living in authoritarian countries, such as China and Syria, as well as by individuals and groups engaging in criminal acts. If our government starts acting like an Orwellian police state, it will only drive more people into the dark alleys of the online world, where unsavoury material is more readily available.

What we have in the “lawful access” legislation is a bill that violates the privacy rights of law-abiding citizens, while leaving criminals easy ways to avoid it entirely — which sounds an awful lot like the gun registry.

We deserve better from our elected officials. The Conservatives have been intent on enacting laws that give more power to police and impose a heavy burden on society, despite a lack of evidence of the effectiveness of such measures. Should our government be vigorously combating such evils as terrorism and child pornography? Of course. But it must find a way to do so without sacrificing Canadians’ basic civil liberties in the process.

Jesse Kline: Lawful access bill set to become the new gun registry | Full Comment | National Post