Greetings fellow humans!
For those who are not Canadian, and those Canadians that live under a rock (or on The Rock, as some choose to do), we've been having... well, a bit of a drama recently.
The Conservative government recently passed a motion that leaves Canada's long-gun registry all but dead. Now, whether you believe this is a good or a bad thing is a matter of debate; the government's stance was that it was an [U]unnecessary intrusion[/U] into the privacy of ordinary Canadians. This is a key concept to keep in mind.
The long-gun registry was an election issue, and its inevitable defeat has been in the tea leaves for quite a while now. Then, during Question Period on February 13th, we receive this lovely new piece of legislation. Sorry for the shitty quality of the video, it was the best I could find.
[video=youtube;fAGUGmGd5kM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAGUGmGd5kM&feature=related[/video]
Skip ahead to 1:10 into the video if you just want to hear him say, or if you don't, then just take my word for it.
[B]"With us or with the child pornographers"[/B]
Or for that matter, take John Ibbitson's,
[Quote= John Ibbitson]What you think of the Conservatives’ new bill to expand police surveillance of the web may depend on what you think of the long-gun registry and the long-form census.
Public Safety Minister Vic Toews will argue that the new legislation, to be introduced Tuesday afternoon, will grant the government access to nothing more than the Internet equivalent of a telephone book, which police need to help track criminals and terrorists.
More related to this story
Mr. Toews takes a dim view of anyone who would question the need for that access. In the Commons, Monday, he said people “can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”
Privacy commissioners in Ottawa and the provinces will not like being called such vile names. They have warned that the Conservatives are violating privacy rights by demanding the authority to collect IP addresses, email addresses, mobile phone numbers and other identifying information on anyone who interests them without a warrant.
The government is unlikely ever to change the privacy commissioners’ minds, or to be swayed by their criticism. Politically, what matters is whether the large-C Conservatives can make the case for the bill with small-c conservatives.
The new legislation, commonly referred to as the lawful access bill, would not give the government the power to track your movements, either online or through your phone, without a warrant. But it would require telecom companies to give up identifying information on clients if asked by the police.
Jennifer Stoddart, the federal privacy commissioner, and Ann Cavoukian, Ontario’s privacy commissioner, maintain that the federal government hasn’t demonstrated the need for these new powers. Ms. Cavoukian is particularly vocal, calling the new bill “surveillance by design.”
There are powerful arguments on both sides. None of us want to handicap police in their efforts to track those who would defraud us, harm children or plot acts of terror. But we must also be wary of granting the state new powers that could restrict the sovereignty of citizens.
On their face, the arguments of the privacy commissioners should find resonance with conservative voters who opposed the federal long-gun registry and the mandatory long-form census. Both were examples of the state intruding in the lives of citizens in search of information it had no right to demand, opponents of the registry and the census maintained. The Conservative Party led that opposition.
Applying that same principle, should the state be allowed to have new powers to know who we are on the web – in effect, to register our online identities – without a judicial warrant or even our knowledge or consent?
Claiming “you’re with us or you’re with the child pornographers” doesn’t even begin to make the case, Mr. Toews.
[url]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-ibbitson/with-us-or-with-the-child-pornographers-doesnt-cut-it-mr-toews/article2337425/[/url][/quote]
The reaction, dare I say, has not been all-together positive. Left, right and centre (no, for the Yanks reading this, I spelled 'centre' correctly, if only in my country) newspapers have been hammering him constantly since. A few days after Mr. Toews came out with his smash-hit single, "With us or with the child pornographers", Anonymous responded:
[video=youtube;OyOQFYeBIho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyOQFYeBIho&feature=related[/video]
And how! Along with that little video, someone - important to note that no one knows who - has been Tweeting personal information about Vic Toews, and specifically about his incredibly messy divorce involving an incident where he may or may not have boinked the babysitter. I don't want to spread rumours though. But that's not the best part.
[B]
The Tweets came from inside the House of Commons.[/B]
[video=youtube;4J4D0uUa6ng]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J4D0uUa6ng[/video]
The account, Vikileaks30, has been taken down. (But if someone with better cashe research skills than I do can scrounge it up, that'd be neat!). Regardless, the highlights of the account are posted here, in this National Post article that's too long to quote fully: [url]http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/15/vikileaks-twitter-account-reveals-embarrassing-details-of-vic-toews-private-life/[/url]. But man has it been a good ride.
At this point the more discerning reader is asking, "But Sixer, you haven't said what's wrong with it!" Ah, to the point: The legislation proposed will allow the government to search your internet his without a warrent. [B]Without a warrent[/B].
This is about my reaction:
[thumb]http://www.myfacewhen.com/images/248.gif[/thumb]
And that was apparently Vic Toews reaction too. One of the stories I've heard (but can't source, sorry) is that Vic Toews actually [I]wasn't aware[/I] that the proposed legislation would let authorities search without a warrent. Legislators often don't know the fine tuning of bills they present, they're just briefed. It was all just a briefing mis-hap. *Slow hand clap*
With all the flak it's been getting, the legislation might just die in committee. One of the things I haven't linked you to in this thread are the comments made by a Conservative back-bencher who has openly voiced his criticism against the bill. Under Harper, this -never- happens. MPs have been kicked from caucus for less.
Anyways, my fellow Canadians, while you're sitting there worrying about the future of your porn-surfing privacy (I mean really, why else would Google and Firefox create private-browsing modes? Just don't get it on the keyboard), you can rest assured that as you sit there stroking your gun there is no way the government will let anyone try and take it away from you. Because there's no contradiction.
They already search your internet without a warrant by letting foreign intelligence agencies do it, and then pass on the details
of course unless you're the head of Al-Qaeda, they won't give a fuck what you're watching
[editline]21st February 2012[/editline]
I bet Vic Toews is starting to appreciate the importance of privacy now though
It's ironic that they claim to support liberties then go and do this crazy shit
Aw, I was expecting some kind of Viking Leaks.
[QUOTE=A Noobcake;34799914]Aw, I was expecting some kind of Viking Leaks.[/QUOTE]
i just know the vikings are hiding somewhere waiting for the right time to attack
[QUOTE=TurbisV2;34799923]i just know the vikings are hiding somewhere waiting for the right time to attack[/QUOTE]
they lurk
in the shadow of the sun
[img]http://www.spaceviking.net/images/space_viking.jpg[/img]
holy shit (some) male canadian accents are so amazingly ear orgasmic
[QUOTE=TurbisV2;34799923]i just know the vikings are hiding somewhere waiting for the right time to attack[/QUOTE]
They're hiding in arctic ice.
[QUOTE=A Noobcake;34799914]Aw, I was expecting some kind of Viking Leaks.[/QUOTE]
That would make a better story.
[QUOTE=Pelican;34801005]holy shit (some) male canadian accents are so amazingly ear orgasmic[/QUOTE]
Yoooooou can't possibly think that. No one in their right mind thinks that. But then I guess y're on Facepunch, so... Although Ryan Reynolds was on Top Gear UK last week and was very well received.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.