Canadian Government to Jam Radio Signals

An anonymous reader submits: "According to this article, the Canadian government has given the military and RCMP permission to jam radio signals during the G8 summit and the Pope's visit. I suppose that the stated reason would be to prevent terrorists from communicating with each other, but I have to wonder whether it's also being done to keep those pesky protesters from effectively organizing at the G8. And if this action manages to block wireless 911 calls, and someone dies because of that, who's going to be willing to step up to the plate and take the blame?"

Comments

Uh..well...gee...

[xeniten]

If my cell phone was ever jammed and I really had to call 911 then that would mean I'd have to rely on a regular old fashioned telephone.

Anybody got a quarter?

Oops

[Oily Tuna]

"It could be used, for example, if there was threat of a detonation of some type of a remote-controlled device. We could jam the frequencies to make sure nobody could send a signal to that bomb."

Jamming is achieved by making sure your signal is stronger than anyone elses', I hope the hypothetical detonation device doesn't simply look for a signal of a significant strength.

There will be more than "blocking 911" to worry about then.

Re:Because we all know...

[agentZ]

Because we all know how terrorists are the only ones who use mobile phones and drug dealers are the only ones who use pages.

While the above is not particularly insightful, it does touch on a good point. It's not just the bad guys who use mobile phones. Having been part of security details for a government organization in the past, our government issued radios don't always work, especially inside large buildings. (Think of the same folks who designed your tax forms trying to make a working radio.) I've found my mobile to be invaluable to make sure the car to pick everybody up is outside and waiting when the principal is ready to go.

Technology is tool that can be used either for good or for evil. By jamming the airwaves, you're preventing everybody from using it and trying to technology from changing the way you do business.

Re:Who really owns the airwaves?

[redvision4]

So what your're saying is that Verizon and Sprint should be the only ones allowed to do whatever they want with the airwaves because the have they most money.

Yes, I see how that is so much better than the government controlling it. Why have representation in the decision? Any one can vote, only those with money can own Verizon stock. That's definitely the best way to go for all of society.

Since this was text, i feel the need to point out my sarcasm above.

Re:The stupidities are multiple.

[lommer]

Just slightly off topic here, but interesting nonetheless.

The reason that explosive crews use "Turn off Transmitter next X miles" is not because they use radio detonation (its dangerous, expensive, and unneccesary unless you are trying to be covert), but because squibs and blasting caps can actually set off by the small amount of current generated through the inductance caused by nearby radio transmissions.

It sounds implausible, and like it would never happen, but there were a couple guys who did some tests a few years ago and found that while unlikely, it was indeed possible. While it seems their site is currently down, there is a google cache of it here.

All of that said and done though, your points are still valid. :-)

Re:The stupidities are multiple.

[ergo98]

You have no idea what their methods of dealing with potential terrorism will be. In this case they merely cleared the way for the option by obtaining permission : They aren't saying "We're going to turn the jammers to 11 all week long and we'll be safe". Because Canada is a free country (yeah yeah...like all Western countries freedom is balanced with civic safety) they had to obtain permission publicly, which is why you hear about this, but they're hardly yelling out their plans.

Breakdown of health care

[sheldon]

The lesson comes at a high cost for many Canadians (witness the breakdown of their health care system),

I am not totally familiar with the Canadian health care system. My understanding is that it's administered by the provinces, and that there has been a lot of discussion as of late of doctor shortages and so forth.

But recently someone on a local usenet newsgroup made this same claim you are making, and in the same note tried to imply that the US health care system is perfectly fine because of it's capitalist nature. (as opposed to the evil of socialism) So I was curious and started looking for some facts.

What I found is that life expectancy in the US is less than other G8 nations which have socialized health care(France, Germany, Canada, UK, Italy, Japan) with the exception of Russia. Furthermore the infant mortality rate is also higher in the US compared to the other G8 nations, again with the exception of Russia.

On top of that, the amount spent on health care in the US per capita is much greater... in the neighborhood of double. This despite(or maybe because of?) something like 40-60 million Americans lacking health insurance.

So I guess I'm puzzled. If Canada's system has broken down, what term do we use to describe the US system? A complete failure?

I'm a pretty big proponent for capitalism, as can be evidenced by my ridicule of the GPL proponents and the Microsoft antitrust trial on /. But I also recognize that health care, like food, clothing and shelter, is a basic human need whereas software is a luxury item. I think that difference in need versus luxury should have some bearing on a discussion as to the economic viability of solutions to a growing problem.

If the best capitalism can do for healthcare is drive costs up without yielding any demonstrable benefits measured by statistical indicators perhaps we should be looking at alternatives?

Comments From the Front Lines:

[linuxbert]

i love my freedoms as a Canadian, and i love my cell phone, and i fully support peoples rights to peacefull demonstration.

I live in Ottawa. during the g8 conference a group of protesters has vowed to disrupt life in the city, and refused to talk to police, or make statements to discourage violence, infact they have encouraged it. Business are boarding up, and citizens are scared.

I do not like when people come to my home and destroy it for there own political goals. I understand the reasons not to block trafic, however, anything that can be done to keep my home from being destroyed by these protestors MUST be done.

civil disobediance is onething (gandhi practiced it, and never once struck out at anyone) wantan distruction of property is another.

before you comment, to this article about how your liberties and freedoms are being taken away by the authorities, think about what you would want if your home town was suddenly faced with thousands of violent protestors.

Re:Comments From the Front Lines:

[Anonymous Coward]

--I was an activist in the 60's. Saw it all from totally peaceful to sheer madness, and everything in between. Nam finally ended once the government realised that the nation was going to be burnt down, and that returning nam vets who were used to violence just didn't cotton to finding out about the lies used to get them over to nam, then the lies used to keep them from actually fighting a winning war. and this included a LOT of returning brutha's who realised how racist the whole deal was, them and the poor whites who got shafted into the "draft" system while theywatched their country club economic level peers getting 2s student deferments or cushy national guard cop out postings. It was corrupt and as scammy as anything you can imagine. Some of the more radical protests started happening once there were hundreds of thousands of returned vets who realised how screwed they had been. This was a "good thing" as the power elite war scammers couldn't claim these were "left wing hippies".

The civil rights act was passed in 64, but it wasn't until 67, 68 and 69 when the protests got violent that there was any constructive change in any of the areas of the nation that still had massive government sponsored discrimination. A lot of this came about from black people picking up the gun and stating they would NOT be victims anymore, no matter what.

The united states was NOT founded on the principles of "passive civil disobedience". to even think this is to deny our own history. Our nations founding fathers were STREET FIGHTERS who had a righteous cause and kicked booty and took names. Our nation was founded by people perfectly willing to fight-and fight hard and for keeps-with king Georges goon squad mercenaries and corrupt bureaucrats. When the people here -who were at the time still under the crown's "government" - decided they had had enough, they GOT VIOLENT about it, because they had exhausted all the other means at their disposal. They tried non violence, it didn't work. They tried just handing out pamphlets and talking-they got arrested whenever found. Torture by the government at the time, "detention" with no trial, secret tribunals were the norm back then. NOW IS THIS STARTING TO SOUND FAMILIAR YET?

Whenever the government gets too corrupt, whenever people's petitons get ignored, whenever the government thinks rights belong to them and they can just dole them out when they feel like it-then it's time for Plan B, which is called "fighting".

Now THAT'S actual political reality. Non violent civil disobedience has NEVER worked, even in your example of india. There was plenty of violence and sabotage went on in india against the british, just gandhi gets the press, but it DID get to the point that british troops and indian qusiling synmpathisers had to be careful as they went about the country.

I don't know what it's going to take to change this nation back to a representative republic, but the way it's going now it won't-it'll still keep creeping towards complete totalitarianism. the constitution is NOT a document that "gives us our rights". We are BORN with them fully intact. the constitution as a document carefully delineates the LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT. Once government crosses those lines-and they do daily, in myriads of ways, then THEY ARE THE LAWBREAKERS. and when their agents use force of arms then THEY ARE THE VIOLENCE-STARTERS, even if it's just the threat.

I'm lucky I guess,I had a public school education, but at least we still had *some* text books and teachers who taught REAL american history, not this skewed propoganda they teach the last 30 years.

The crap that is going on now with this government would have been called nazi or worse back when i was a kid. Random checkpoints on the road? ARE YOU KIDDING? that was sdomething that only happened in places like easty germany. Police wiretapping all your conversations and installing cameras all over? ARE YOU KIDDING? politicians would have been hanging from trees.

This government is corrupt, fascist, and it got that way one small tiny step at a time, the frog boiling concept. Everytime I read here of even one minute wasted on video games i realise that's one step closer to a total takeover, because people DON'T CARE. this is called "bread and circuses", fascist governments have used this technique for ages, because it works. If it's not video games it's professional sports or becoming addicted to popular music and MP3's or something like that.

Here's anotyher clue on non violence. Walk around your nearest ghetto holding ouyt a wad of cash. when the inevitable mugger comes up and steals your money, try EVERY SINGLE NON VIOLENT METHOD YOU CAN THINK UP, and see if you make it home with your money. go ahead, try it, double dog dare ya, literally put your money out in the open where your non violent theories are in real world beta testing, see what happens. You or anyone who thinks that way. There's theory, then reality. Video games or reality. Big hint Life is not a video game.

Muggers and fascist governments exist only by matter of scale, all the other attributes remain exactly the same.

Non violence, here's a great historical example= "jews peacefully boarding trucks going to the camps".

People becoming free from fascists = "old white guys featured on greenbacks nowadays wasting britsh troops and hessian mercenaries". That's in our history, but today they would be called "terrorists", well, because they actually were terrorists-against the fascist royal "crown".

Excuse ther typos, I honestly don't feel like fixing them. this isn't a troll, it's something I can contribute to a lot of younger slashdotters. I'm pretty low on the scale with the technical matters and jargon, politics and history is something I can contribute a little one. Some of the old farts here might actually remember what I am talking about for that matter. Non violence has it's place, this is a gimme of course, and it would be nice if that was ever all that was ever needed -in TRIVIAL matters. Once you have gotten to the point that the matters are as basic as where your food is coming from, whether or not it's a good idea to have 4 large mega corporations controlling the worlds seeds and food supply, or the worlds energy supplies, or even buying up or stealing water rights all over the planet, when large countries can just invade other countries on any concoicted whim and kill people by the thousands or millions, when any group of connected elite decide that THEY know best-like the G8 doods insist on- all these sorts of NON trivial issues-then non violent means become almost a complete waste of time. When the 'voting" process is so screwed up that there's little or no chance of breaking the political stranglehold two virtually identical criminal gangs have on the government-then non violent means seem a waste of time.

The big question is "how bad does it have to get before that line is crossed"?

I do not have any easy answer for that one, no one does, it's probably un-answerable.

These goons at the g8 are global pirates, fascists, that's why theyhave to hide in a remote area to meet and use their police mercenaries for protection, no matter what political ideology they espouse. They are seeking to create a global cartel of a small handfull mega corporations running the world.

Ask yourself, is this a good thing or bad thing? Is national soverignty or personal soveringty important, or trivial? Here's another, when's the last time the government actually reacted to a petition? As compared to how much strange fascist legislation gets passed based on corporate large scale bribes paid to politicians? How about in the states where they have refernedums on the ballot, say like with medical marijuana use, it gets passed, but the higher level goon fascists use their armed mercenaries to "enforce'their views despite the legal non violent methoid being used first, ie, "the vote'?

How bad does it have to get? Where's anyones line in the sand? the government is the most violent entity ouyt there, and they use violence QUICKER than any other organization or individual.

In the gestalt, everyone has to choose the level of slavery they will put up with. Government is an attempt to legislate common sense civil discourse and society. When the government (or group of private fatcats posing as legitimate governments) usurps that into just becoming a bully who tells you what you will do, at the point of their viuolent guns and 'agents" in obvious defiance of their own stated laws and regulations, then what is that called again? A dictatorship? And are dictatorships considered good, or evil?

Sometimes simple questions cqn lead to better understanding. Sometimes anyway.

Re:Who really owns the airwaves?

[zangdesign]

What really kills me is that the topic of whether or not Canada is a capitalist society or not.

Who cares? Canadians? Great! They should!

American? Why? It's their freakin' country - they make their own decisions. What's right for use may or may not be right for them, but it's their freakin' decision!

/. is turning into society of nosy old women, poking their noses in everyone else's business and bitching and moaning when they don't do like /. would.

Re:The stupidities are multiple.

[Stonehand]

According to Israeli reports, a fair number of bomber-wannabes actually fail due to lack of nerve, being spotted and neutralized before being able to detonate the explosives, and so forth. Some of these causes could be worked around with a decent radio-controlled device and an observer with a trigger (who, for instance, could blow up the explosives belt if the bomber suddenly changes his mind and decides to surrender).

Also, they're not all suicidal. From what I've read, the authorities in Pakistan are at least considering the possibility that the recent car bombing there was remote-detonated... and it might be easier to get one smart, but non-suicidal electrical engineer with a talent for bomb-design into a Western country than enough wannabe martyrs to mount a really prolonged campaign. The Unabomber managed to send quite a few mail bombs, for instance, and probably was more effective due to apparent lack of death wish.

Conspiracy

[Anonymous Coward]

This is nothing more than petty retaliation for previous attempts to inform people on what goes on in such events.

During the last G8 summit in Genoa certain organizations used radio broadcasting to tell the public present in the city of the multiple abuses of power by authorities in Genoa and around the world.

The truth is not something that many in power want to get around. After Genoa, radio, albeit pirate radio, was also used in Doha, Qatar during the WTO ministerial conference. A Google search for "No New Round Radio" results in the archives of this pirate radio station.

Considering then that in the last two international events of this magnitude, radio played a large role in letting people express their opinions in a peaceful manner, then it is quite natural that the authorities are choosing to jam radio signals. They want to keep the oppresed masses ignorant!

Reporters are the more likely target!

[adoll]

I was at an emerency preparedness presentation in Edmonton today. Seems that the cell phone system during the Pine Lake tornado was crashed by a bunch of media reporters. I suspect they are the real target of this jamming.

During Pine Lake, "individuals" decided that they needed to use the 12 available Cell channels in the remote town to do Live reports back to the Big Cities... so they grabbed the cell frequencies and NEVER HUNG UP! These press people are not terribly popular when they hogged resources that ambulance and SAR people might also want to use!

Fortunately there are a lot of HAM operators in Alberta and they were able to provide radio relays to the SAR people and bypass the phone service.

-AD

Re:Voluntary, unlike socialism.

[ergo98]

Yeah, it's called democracy, and it's alive and well, and overwhelmingly Canadians support "socialist" health care (which, in reality, means "We all agree to buy into the big health insurance policy"). The people who make the choices are the electorate which goes to the polls and makes its feelings known.

Of course, as I mentioned in another post, the only Americans who "choose" not to have health insurance are the very poor who can't afford it. What a great choice.

Freaky security

[pod]

Went hiking today in the area where the G8 will be held. The area is already closed off. The particluar mountain we went to was (just) outside the get-your-ass-arrested zone, but nevertheless we had to sign in and show id, and were cautioned not to get too close to the zone. There are black helicopters flying around (even over the city), often in groups of 3 in close formation. I don't even want to know what will happen during the actual summit. I'll also probably call in sick Thurs/Friday so I don't have to dodge protesters and pepper spray on my way to/from work.

I doubt the Pope's visit will get as much security, after all having 8 heads of the most powerful states in one convinient location must make for an awfully tempting target for anyone with an axe to grind.

Re:Jamming 911 calls

[Pyramid]

"Next we have the woman jogging in the park who is suddenly being chased by a man. She reaches for her cell phone to dial 911, but no signal. Why? HER government, the one that is supposed to be protecting her, has decided to jam the signal. She then has no way to call for help, and if no one hears here cries for help, she might be raped and/or killed by her attacker"

This passage highlights a fundumental problem with society; IT IS NOT THE GOVERMENT'S JOB TO PROTECT YOU! There have been supreme court decisions that say the police are not required to PROTECT ANYONE.

This is the argument the gun control nuts use and it drives me crazy. They say you're supposed to let the Police/Gov't protect you and that there's no reason to own a gun, yet the police have no obligation to protect you! They're there to solve crimes after the fact, as in AFTER YOU'RE DEAD.

If it weren't for the gun controllers and their ilk, the said above mentioned woman would be able to take her safety into her own hands by carrying a gun she spent the time receiving training to wield properly.

So yes it's annoying that cell frequencies will be jammed, but the responsibility to protect a person lies solely on themselves. That there are others to do it (family, friends, good Samaritans or the police) is pure gravy. It's isn't the job of the goverment to protect you and shield you from all harm! That whole mentality is why our society is going to hell. It isn't the government's job to do anything but to provide basic public services (that are supposed to be decided upon by the people) and to protect it's borders. Great social ideas like "it takes a village to raise a child" (bullshit, it takes loving parents) are the product of our increasingly socialist society.

Noone teaches the virtue of personal responibility anymore. Why should I bother taking an interest in anyone or anything if no part of life is my responsibility?

Pyramid