Canadian Government Weary of Patriot Act

IllogicalStudent writes "An article on canoe discusses how the Canadian government is moving to counter worries surrounding Canadian citizens' privacy being compromised by the United States' Patriot act. Apparently the FBI currently has the right, through Patriot, to search documents which may contain Canadian information sent to US firms carrying out work under contract. Thankfully, privacy still means something up here."

Comments

Just goes to show

[alexwcovington]

When you get paranoid, your friends suffer more than your enemies...

Re:Just goes to show

[MarkRose]

I don't see how this applies here. First, the US wasn't being paranoid when they implemented the USA Patriot act -- it was simply a police-state power grab.

Canada, on the other hand, has every right to be concerned. Perhaps our "paranoia" will bring more attention to the issue in the us, helping our friends to the south out.

s/Weary/Wary/

[franl]

'nuf said.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[SenseiLeNoir]

Seconded...

I am also a brit, and the one thing i really love about Canada is the way it merged the Best of Britain, America and Europe into a country.

It is certainly intresting how Canada is more socialist than even Britain sometimes, and its a good thing, when you also see how its run, and the kind nature of the people.

I am not dissing Americans either, American citizens are really nice too. But I see the attitudes of the people not nessasarily reflected in aspects of the administrative procedures, which really can ruin a hoilday by a tourist.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[lphuberdeau]

I think your forgetting about the hundreds (thousands?) of billions the US has in debt for various reasons, including the Bush wars.

Canada has debts too, because they decided at some point to develop infrastructures and improve life quality of the citizens. Now they are trying to pay it off.

Did all those bombs bring you inner peace?

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[qw(name)]

You forgot one:

Borderline socialist state

Free speech is systematically being taken away from the people. Far more so that here in US. When a person can be legally arrested for being "politically incorrect" a huge red flag should go up. Unfortunately, that's the direction the US is headed...

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[packeteer]

They attacked the WTC because it was a shining example of freedom, but they hate all christians, and intend to kill us all. no matter how cowardly you are, or where you run and hide.

Bahahahaha... riiiiiight...

Who knows why they attacked the WTC but i would guess thats not why. Maybe it was beucase it was the symbol of their oppression. A symbol of our power over them? They do not hate all christains. They do not want all christains dead. Look at some of the laws put in place in Iraq and other countires with the purpose of raping their economy so a few thousand people sitting in towering office buildings can get rich.

I find it conveniant that you talk about your family as having fought in every war. Thats very nice and all but i would like to think that we dont give any extra credit to someone's opinion ebcuase of what their family did. What if your family owned slaves? Should that follow you everywhere?

BTW nice job calling "Muhamad (ewww) Ali" a coward, nice touch.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[Monx]

Remind me again how DS1 had anything to do with our freedom.

Also, don't forget which "freedom loving" nation put Hussein in power and gave him the only WMD he ever had. How many dictatorships have we established over the years?

Have you ever heard of the School of the Americas? The US is directly responsible for most of the torture and brutality that went on in Latin America in the 20th century. I have family on the receiving end of the results of those wonderful lessons in "freedom."

I don't beat up random people, that does not make me a coward. Learn some history before you go shooting your mouth (and your guns) off again.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[gowen]

the US remains the last truly free country.

Unless you want to:
i) pay for sex
ii) smoke marijuana
iii) marry (or have a legal union with) someone of your own gender
iv) implement a number of simple mathematical algorithms in software
v) have a telephone conversation without risk of government surveillance
vi) travel internally on an aeroplane without ID....

I could go on. The US is the the last truly free country, as long as you define "free" as "free to do those things the government, in its wisdom, allow you to do".

Exactly like every other Western Democracy.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[hodet]

" Canada has ridiculous gun laws. I guess they only want their violent criminals to own guns. They are well on the way to outlawing Christianity through BS 'hate crime legislation.' Love or hate the Patriot Act, the US remains the last truly free country."

Dude, you need to stop getting all your information from Fox News.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[schon]

Very strong civil liberties

You mean like the right for gays to marry the person they love?

You crack me up sometimes.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[TOWebstress]

Don't forget being able to freely file-share music in Canada. It's protected under the law here.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't respond to the gun law legislation and outlawing of certain religions in Canada.

Gun law is only an issue in the USA, where a lot of people are afwaid the nashty gowwerment's gonna come and take all their ickle toys awway. Outside the USA nobody gives a fuck about whether you need a permit for a gun or not, because it doesn't make the slightest difference to their life.

Only in the USA is "owning a gun" considered a more important human right than the rights to life, a fair trial, etc.

As for the "outlawing of religions"... what the fuck are you smoking? Nobody has outlawed any religions in Canada. Not even Christianity. "Hate speech" legislation does not prevent Christians from saying "Muslims worship a false god and we believe they will spend an eternity in hell". It merely prevents Christians from saying "kill all the Muslims so they'll get to hell sooner". That's not outlawing anyone's religion.

It might theoretically be considered "removing a freedom". But it's just as easy to argue that a Muslim's fundamental right not to be the target of hate speech is just as deserving of protection as a Christian's "fundamental right" to say things that no sane person would consider it reasonable to say.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[InadequateCamel]

We don't have less guns in Canada, we are frigging gun nuts! The difference is that we tend not to use them on each other, as indicated by the homicide rate in my province (typically around 1 per capita)

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[crunk]

Oh really? What is going on in Iraq? We have far superior technology than they do, and they are still able to keep an insurgency going.

And I can tell you have never been to the southern U.S. I live in N.C. and I could tell you without a doubt the rednecks around here would not give in without a fight. Hell, if we were even invaded by another country they wouldn't make it past the Outer Banks let alone places like Georgia and Alabama. Dude, I'm talking _serious_ rednecks.

Remember how the British were crushed by the Americans in the War of 1812 in Louisiana? Andrew Jackson was able to assemble a militia from common men who used their personal rifles.

An armed populous is not such a bad thing.

Re:s/Weary/Wary/

[issachar]

For the record I am a Canadian citizen and I am in Canada. (Specifically in Coquitlam sitting at home posting to slashdot because having a cold sucks). The question is whether or not I have broken the law. Maybe I have, but if I have, then it is an unjust law.

I'm not a church leader, but does that make a difference in this case? If it's legal for me to say something, shouldn't be legal for someone else to say the same thing? More to the point, how many people have to think I'm worth listening to before I'm a "community leader"?

I think you have good motivations, but you cannot protect society from hateful ideas by criminalizing speech. Bad ideas need to be confronted and destroyed by better ideas.

Emotional & Mental hurt are not on the same playing field as physical hurt. And people should never be granted the same protections from "emotional hurt" as they are from physical hurt. This is because "emotional hurt" is entirely in the mind of the "victim". This is not to say that it's doesn't exist. It does, but it's not subject to outside quantification the way physical harm is. Punching people in the face is easily identified as physically hurtful & violent. The impact of words depends on who is listening.

Participation in society requires people to understand the "sticks and stones" sing-song. Names do hurt, but you can't protect people from names without dreadfully harming the free intercourse of ideas essential to a functioning democracy.

You're right that hate has no place in society. But you can't legislate hate away. Hate needs to be met my love & ideas. Pushing it into a hole just allows it to fester and grow.

Weary or wary?

[illtron]

So are they weary or wary? A little copy editing goes a long way, you know.

Land crossing question

[DrXym]

Do Canadians get fingerprinted and photographed at the border like all us other foreign criminals?

I wonder how many terrorists this amazingly intrusive and expensive system has actually caught.

Re:Land crossing question

[DarkBlack]

No one will ever know. All that has to be reported is the number of times they have requested and the number of times it was granted.

At least before they had to have some sort of probable cause, now all they need is one word - terrorism.

It's interesting because I got a big long winded letter from one of my senators explaining why he voted to erode my rights, and that he didn't think that the act eroded constitutional rights. I guess he missed that part about probable cause in amendment IV of the Bill of Rights. Go figure.

For your information, this was Senator John Warner from Virginia.

Re:Land crossing question

[brettlbecker]

Don't think for a minute that the PATRIOT act is about actually catching criminals. Of course, in order to catch a criminal, an actual law has to be broken first, and this act sorta just steps to the side of that little point...

But that's not the issue. The PATRIOT act is simply a control-through-fear technique. Keep the masses in fear of 1) an outside power - the terrorists 2) the structure designed to remove 1) - the law ... mix together and you have a cycle of fear-relief-fear-relief ad infinitum. Oh, and it helps to have such a compliant media, and it REALLY helps to have such a heavily sedated public. And as a bonus, the government can basically collect any information it wants about any member of the public. Just for future... consideration. It really is Orwell-worthy... if only he could see it actually come to fruition.

Oh, and about the numbers of criminals that have been caught under this law? I dunno, but the number of convictions as far as terrorism goes is exactly ZERO. Nice job there, Ashcroft!

B

Re:Land crossing question

[sgant]

Exactly. It's a world of fear....not just a nation.

We were better off when we had the Soviets and Communism to fear. Back then, the media was pretty much under control and not the fear-spewing idiots they are now. But after the fall of the Soviet Union, there was nothing really to fear for a short while....the politicians didn't have anyone to rally against, the media didn't have fear-laden headlines to sell commercials and papers.

It's a fiasco now...with terrorists behind every tree, global warming melting the entire Earth, liberal media vs. conservative media....dogs & cats living together: MASS HYSTERIA!

Re:Land crossing question

[Skater]

Ashcroft? Remember, both Democrats and Republicans voted for this act.

Re:Land crossing question

[TGK]

Nice with the Ghostbusters ref, though I doubt many people got it.

You're 100% right, for a number of reasons. First off, our security was threatened a great deal more by the Soviet Union than by international terrorism.

There are reports (which I've cited on /. before, but I'm too lazy to find right now, go find them yourself if you care) that the Soviets had gone so far as to install a small low yeild warhead in the basement of their embasy in DC so as to pull off a decpitation strike if things ever got really bad. I belive this was during the Nixon Administration.

The World Trade Center sucked, and so does the so called war on terror, but the casualties of the cold war are staggering by comparison.

Vietnam: 58,000 Dead
Korea: 33,000 Dead
WOMD Pointed At Us: 55,000

Compare to the War on Terror where casualties have been measued in the thousands and there remain no WMD pointed at us.

The Bush appologists will tell you this is because of the superior quality of the US military in this war, and the continued dominance of the US as a the last remaining superpower.

They might be right on that second point. Just as the school bully generaly fairs better picking on a 1st grader than a HS Senior, so also will the US fair better picking on Iraq or Afghanistan than China or Russia.

We're blowing this out of proportion. Terrorism is a threat, yes, but a threat to be compared to other fiarly innocuous problems throughout American History. Terrorism is like the 21st century's version of the 19th Century's Mexican War.

Weapons of Mass destruction are still terrifying, but as long as a superweapon can be smuggled into our cities in the bloodstream of a legaly documented traveler... what can we possibly do? It's time calm down, get our wits about us, and face the world.

Unfortunately, we've just elected a witless redneck to another four years of marioneting by Dick Cheney, Dark Lord of the Sith.

Is there any room up in Canukistan?

Re:Land crossing question

[strider44]

Compare to the War on Terror where casualties have been measued in the thousands

That is misleading and/or incorrect. The correct statement is: Compare to the War on Terror where American casualties have been measued in the thousands

Re:Land crossing question

[damian cosmas]

"Don't think for a minute that the PATRIOT act is about actually catching criminals."

Unless I'm very much mistaken, it's actually about taking powers the government already has (and which require court orders) under RICO and FISA, and allowing them to be used as investigative tools (again with court orders) against terrorists, instead of just gangsters and spies. In other words, catching criminals.

"Oh, and about the numbers of criminals that have been caught under this law?"

More importantly, can you give me the number of people whose civil liberties have *actually* been violated (N.B. not those who "felt" they were violated) under specific provisions of the PATRIOT Act?

Re:Land crossing question

[FungiFromYuggoth]

The Lancet article was a peer-reviewed estimate of Iraqi civilian casualties since the invasion as around 100,000 as of the fall of last year. Based on the statistics, the true number could be between 5,000 and 200,000, but the highest probability was around 100,000.

The methodology was to compare the rate of deaths before the war and the deaths after the war. If someone dies because Bechtel can't manage to get sewage treatment back on line, that counts as a death related to the US invasion just as surely as a cluster bomb dropped on a house full of civilians.

Note that the WaPo article gets the other casualty count sources wrong - Iraq Body Count is tracking confirmed casualties in the Western media. They acknowledge that they are definitely undercounting, simply because the Western media is not present at all locations where bodies are found.

A sizeable chunk of Iraqis would actually prefer life under Saddam to the current lawless situation. Not all, not even most, but more than you'd like.

The choice between what Bush is doing and Saddam is a false dichotomy. Last year, a majority of Iraqis wanted the Americans to leave immediately - even those who felt that it would increase violence. Apparently, the Bush administration knew better.

Whether or not the initial invasion's benefits outweighed its costs (for the US or the Iraqis), the question about the current occupation is entirely separate.

Given the extremely high turnout for last weekend's elections, I'd say that the question has been rather eloquently answered, don't you?

Not really; the turnout was less than in South Vietnam in 1967. Anyway, how many of those Iraqis went to the polls to vote the Americans out?

Pity about those Iraqi Christians who couldn't vote.

Allow me to clarfiy

[alexwcovington]

The Patriot Act was the result of Paranoia... Of people willing to endorse anything if it was security-related. I would still like to count Canada as a US friend, even if half the politicians down here call it "Canuckistan"...

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[anonicon]

You guys can call it whatever you want, but I'm just relieved that there's a big country to the north to escape to if the residents of Dumfuckistan pull more stupid stunts.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[gobbo]

Sorry, but if Americans deem to tell the rest of the world what to do (including Canadians!), put military bases in over 100 countries, hijink any trade initiative they near, and play vindictive patriotism games (oh, your country doesn't support our war of agression? ok, burn your flags and deprecate your products) --well, then, they'll just have to put up with people poking fun at them. Frequently.

Power is like that, you open yourself up to ridicule as a matter of fair play. You can't have your Twinkie and eat it too.

Why are a disproportionate number of top hollywood comedians canadian? It might have to do with national outlook.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[gobbo]

We want to make the world a better place for the oppressed.

Ka-wow, did you really just write that? Many of us in other liberal democracies look at the American system of health care, poverty abatement, and prisons, and shudder. We see oppressive systems that are polluted with inequities and indignities, more so than our own considerable problems. We see the way the trade missions turn countries from an emphasis on self-reliance into exporters of commodity goods based on unequal trade--without mitigating corruption in any way. We see the constant global war, using a thin veil of cries of freedom to pave the way for further inequitable commercial opportunity.

Tell me more about how your concern for the oppressed has affected, for example, the status of women in Iraq? The status of children in Angola? Dissidents in your client countries? Saipan? A century of policy towards Haiti, Cuba, Puerto Rico? Guatemala? How about pollution from your over 700 international military bases? The list goes on ad infinitum. And AC's, do your research before a kneejerk rebuttal on this one, please.

We see you edging ever closer to a cynical theocracy. You have enough WMD to wipe anyone out, and a national sense of manifest destiny linked with a popular myth of imminent armageddon.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[Ced_Ex]

We want to make the world a better place for the oppressed. We did this for Afghantistan and Iraq already, they both held full free elections for the first time in their countries history. What has your country done to make the world better? Exactly nothing.

You can't even see past your own government and media deception to even begin to understand what your country has done on your behalf.

You haven't made it better for the "opressed". Their lives are crappier now since their country is in full civil war. They never asked for your help. And as far as I can remember, the original reason for going to Iraq was for WMDs! NOT to free the opressed. Funny how the mission statement changes when the objectives couldn't be completed.

Let's just list out the "nothing" that Canada has done. Anytime we deploy our military (as sad as it is), we put them in world hot spots for PEACE KEEPING. We go to places to STOP wars, not to wage them.

Oh, if you want to talk about war, let's talk about WWI, and WWII. Just so you know, Canada was actively participating in the two wars SEVERAL YEARS before the US got involved. So don't ever say we have contributed nothing.

I am by no means trying to bash the US, as they are truly a leading nation. However, I am just sad that with all the resources they have to make the world a better place, they choose not to. I believe just recently that Bill Clinton mentioned that if the US government (notice I say government, as opposed to citizen) just allocated a small fraction of GWB's $80 Billion request for defense funds for Iraq to something like medicines and food, the world would be a better place.

I ask you, can you not think of a better way to spend $80B to make the world a better place than to spend it on weapons used to destroy. Spend it building homes, giving food, clothing. That is how you make a better world.

PS: I don't post anonymously because I truly believe in what I say.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[Anonymous Coward]

"No, we make fun of them as a means of highlighting your ignorance in hopes you will do something about it. That most Americans don't know jack about the rest of the world is news. We don't make fun to feel smug and righteous. We make fun because we're concerned about your massive ignorance of worldly events and how it drives your politics."

Well, Canadia is in pretty good shape up dere, right? You've got demorcarcy, TV and fast food, so your all set. It's not like we need to know so much about you. Not like Derkaderkastan, where we have to keep our eye out for the terrorists!

"If you checked out the "Talking to Americans" website from the grandparent post, you'll see that most of it was talking to American politicians and some "influential" celebrities. These are the people that influence what Americans believe and are supposed to know about the world around them, and they clearly don't."

You know they only use the hilariously awful footage that they get, right? Anyway, how is one supposed to react when they're told that Canada *something rediculous here*?

"OK, in 2000 you didn't know G. W. was a fuckup, but this time you should have"

Ugh, I knew both times, and so did my state, but we couldn't turn the tide. =P

"We are, however, often offended by American politicians and media. Their deception, bias, illogical reasoning, and clear pandering towards good sound bites and entertainment over truth is quite obvious and offensive."

Americans agree with you, mostly. We just can't do anything about it. It goes back to that "Talking to Americans" thing - when someone just starts lying to you there is no good response. The effort it takes to lie is smaller than the effort required to disprove the lie. That's true of half truths and distortions also.

Watching Fox News increases the chance that you will have a major misunderstanding about the war in Iraq. The Bush Jr. administration systematically distorts science. That people are taken in by it is neither suprising nor preventable. =( The "Talking to Americans" skit only shows how easy it is to do, even when you mean well.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[Qzukk]

Tedious twaddle says the coward.

Pray tell, in what country does the U.S. have a military base where the local government seeks the base removed.

Every time an American soldier rapes someone in Japan theres a pretty big push to kick the Americans out. Panama was a pretty risky occupation there for a while when the canal ownership transfer didn't look like it was going too smoothly.

Pray tell, oh enlightened one, about trade barriers.

Very well, lets talk about Iraq, and the oil embargo, and how the US ignores barriers whenever it feels like it. Or how America (and other countries, America isn't alone in this) backs such barriers only when it benefits corporations, not consumers or laborers.

God, please do do tell me just what those 8 million Iraqi's were doing last weekend

Wait, were we there for the election last week? Only months ago it seemed we were there to depose Saddam, and months before that to protect the United States from WMDs, and months before that to protect the United States from Al Quaeda terrorists, all the time using battle maps drawn up before 9/11 when the plan was to go to war for oil.

I'm glad Bush finally got his story in synch with reality. Those votes only cost us about $12 billion each... At that expense you'd think that we could spare the $200 to fly Iraqis in America to one of the 8 voting places set aside for them. With the names of the campaigners not revealed until days before the election, and very few of those even campainging, confusion was rampant, and voters had no choice but to vote randomly. This is the democracy we died for? At least women's rights will be restored to pre-american-interference levels. Who knows, maybe in a decade or two being publically Christian will be non-fatal again.

Oh, and BTW, you people know very little about the Patriot Act

And what do YOU know about it, other than what you've read in the law itself and what little your government admitted to you?

But hey, cowards like you just like to spout off nonsense and run, thinking "gee I showed that guy" when all you really showed is that you can spout off a lot of stuff.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[freemacmini]

You didn't give a shit about saddam for the last 20 years. You don't give a shit about "bullshit like saddam" right now all over the world.

When is the US going to invade north korea, israel, russia, china, most of africa, cuba, nepal, east timor, pakistan, egypt etc?

It's not. Why? Well some of them might fight back, others have no oil.

BTW saddam didn't gas his own people. He gassed the kurds (which are not his own people) with the chemical weapons we gave him. We also supplied him with the intelligence needed to gas not only kurds but the iranians too. Stop being sanctimonious and accept your part of the responsiblity for horrific murder of tens of thousands of people.

Be a man and say "I as a citizen of the US indirectly helped Saddam hussein kill and torture people for decades because he was a useful tool for me, and to accomplish some objectives I felt were in my best interest". Follow that by saying "I as an American am the most important person on the planet, I am willing to kill, torture, and support killers and torturers to satisfy my needs and objectives. My interests lie above any other human beings or animals and plants for that matter."

Get that off your chest and then lets talk about your righteous indignation.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[Ced_Ex]

Because this would be very difficult to measure. The thing is, people like you don't consider deaths due to the UN embargoes, totalitarian regimes, or anything like that, as being countable. Only deaths as the result of US military action. Kind of shows your whole agenda.

There may be death as an indirect result UN Embargoes, but unlike US military action, there wasn't an intent to do so. US Military actually went in and bombed the crap out of them. Don't tell me "collateral damage" is indirect. It's a BOMB for Christ's sake, it's meant to blow up things.

Operation Iraqi Freedom

Free the people of Iraq from the start? The initial reason for war in Iraq was for terrorists and WMDs. Have you forgotten that already? What about the debacle regarding false reports of the CIA? Forget that too? News reports when the Iraqi war started all concentrated on looking for WMDs that Saddam had as well as the terrorists he was harbouring. Funny how you fail to mention that. This freedom for Iraqi people came to be only after your Gov realized it was grasping at straws to find a reason to be over there.

Oh, don't forget that the Mujahideen were also freedom fighters that you abandoned in Afganistan. Funny how they are known as terrorists now.

Where, exactly, have you prevented wars? The Sudan? Mogadishu? Bosnia? Your model of doing nothing is certainly no more effective than our model of doing something. And it has been repeatedly shown that peacekeeping forces actually do more harm than good.

Cyprus, Bosnia, Croatia, Haiti, just to name a few, granted we didn't stop an entire war, but stopping battles where we can does help. Certainly trying to stop a war is much better than actively starting one with a sovereign nation. I would say it is more effective since we aren't actively shooting and bombing the country that we are trying to help. Please, show us where peacekeeping is more harmful than good? Never realized trying to stop a war was worse than participating in one.

Another humorous point - yes you were there, but don't you find it interesting that our presence turned the tide? We were the deciding factor in that war.

Oh yes, all hail the mighty Americans who came in half way through the war. Any country can be the deciding factor when they join the war when it's almost done. Hell, I can beat Mike Tyson in a boxing match after he's fought 24 consecutive rounds against Lewis and Klitchko.

Good idea, let's build a home in insurgent controlled territory. See how long that will last. Frickin' hippie.

No, according to you, your solution would be to drop bombs on them and kill them all. Great solution there. I'm sure this is the exact reason why the world thinks so highly of US Foreign policy.

I love to hear Canadians talk about how you would make the world better.

Well, I think the world is a better place without wars. If you don't think so, why don't you live in a war torn region and tell me how great it is. We're not contributing to a war torn society, unlike your government. My country is not imposing it's lifestyle on you or anyone else, but your country is actively going to other countries and doing that very thing.

Forcing a lifestyle on others isn't the magic answer either.

Re:Allow me to clarfiy

[Qzukk]

This is news to me.

Start of Panama Canal Transfer problems. End of the transfer problems when the US finally fulfills its treaty obligation 22 years late. And since this is "news" to highschool history failures like you, the end of the US military occupation of Panama that went along with that transfer.

The people of Okinawa have protested several times since the end of the war, the largest such protest after a 12 year old girl was raped. The Japanese government usually ignores it, mostly because of American threats of economic ruin in the event that the bases have to "suddenly go away".

I'm so sorry that I didn't spend the time to look up more cites for you to ignore last time, and I know you ignored them because you ignored my next cite:

IN-TER-NA-TION-AL community tried sanctions to affect change. I would think you would approve?

Hell yeah, I approved. Shame that both Clinton and Bush apparently didn't, since their administrations knew about the violations and did nothing about it. You'd know that if you had read the link I gave you. Or hell, if you had read your newspaper instead of using it to wipe your ass.

The Iraqi that voted did not come out of polling places raging against America or the election process. (For now we'll ignore the fact that two major political parties boycotted the election because of their belief that the US could not run a fair election)

Just wait until the US slaps them with the bill. How pissed off will they be then when America siphons off what little money they have over a $100billion bill? Until then, as one of the people who paid for this big experiment at the cost of $12(at least, since the initial 72% turnout estimate has already slipped to 60%... nobody really knows how many people showed up, and of those how many were turned away due to typical American election oopsies like lack of ballots)billion per vote, I have the right to be upset about how my money was spent.

for the first time is exercising his freedom

wrong, wrong, wrong. Scroll down to the bottom, and note how this weekend was the first election in 50 years. Thats right, folks, Iraq used to have elections! They used to be a democracy!

is an aspiration with real meaning to a people who have suffered from decades of dictatorship.

Who needs dictatorship when we can suffer from your ignorance (and that of others like you). Tell you what, save up a few pennies every day and go buy yourself a nice set of Encyclopedias. Get the ones with the big colorful pictures, they're easier to read.

Google should move to Canada

[Everyman]

If Google was headquartered in Canada and kept all their user cookie data, search-term data, and Gmail servers inside of Canada, the world would be a better place because ordinary people would have more privacy rights.

Next up for Canada...

[mikeb39]

Telling Bush he can shove his missile defense system up his idea hole. We really would rather work towards a more peaceful world through understanding and compromise, not a peace built on fear and threats.

I for one welcome...

[jarich]

I for one welcome our new Slashdot, politicized story spinning overlords!

Okay, so it's not new, but it seems to be more obvious recently...

You have no right to visit here

[Shivetya]

Other than what is granted by the host country. What is wrong with a country wanting to track foreign nationals inside their border? When does your personal rights exceed that of a country you do not even hold citizenship in?

In other words, does your selfishness override the rights of the country in question to do what it can to protect its citizens and police its borders?

As someone else mentioned, your not forced to come here.

Along your line of reasoning why should I have to declare anything to foreign customs agents when I arrive or leave their countries? Why should I have to tell German authorities I am in their country. Hell with that, why should I put up with "THEIR" idea of airport security, after all it annoys me.

Re:You have no right to visit here

[statistically dead]

The problem with the PATRIOT act is that the US is using it to force other countries to supply data on individuals that don't even travel to the US - The EU has been pressured into granting Paseenger Flight Data be given to the US for flights in EU airspace (that don't even go to the US). The US government is demanding biometric passports from other countries because US officials are too lazy or don't want to spend money on granting visas. The fact is that the US is forcing the effects of the PATRIOT act indiscriminately onto non-US citizens that don't even visit the US

Re:You have no right to visit here

[Fallus Shempus]

Then close the border, or do you want the tourist dollar? And yes my prsonal rights do (or should) exceed those of a 'country', not a citizen of that coutry, but the country itself. This is xenophobia, pure and simple, it's the assumption that a foreign national is a more of a threat than a citizen, go tell Timothy McVey.

Re:You have no right to visit here

[nbert]

Fair enough, a sovereign country can do almost anything within its borders. However, I believe that it's nevertheless valid to complain about unreasonable treatment of visitors.

For example back in the mid 90's I had to declare that I'm not planning any attacks on the White House when I visited the US (coming from Europe). There surely was no harm done to me, but seriously, how childish can it get?

Border guards

[jimhill]

One time I zipped up into Canada on a day trip. Going in, the Canadian border guards wanted to know if I had any firearms or ammunition. Coming back, the US border guards wanted to know if I had any fruits or vegetables. That says a lot (hey, two words!) about our two countries.

Sorry to say that's not the American way

[Anonymous Coward]

The facts of history indicate peace isn't something the USA has ever been interested in, a nation can change but i dont think it will be soon.

Re:Privacy laws extend internationally

[nbert]

There is a flaw in this argument, because those European privacy laws have different intentions than the Patriot Act (I guess I don't really have to explain the differences).

And as for your second point:
If I'm for example buying a book at amazon.de (having created an account there) they have to obey German/EU privacy laws, because they are doing business in Germany. Since I can log into amazon.com with my account I don't really believe that they are following the official safe harbor policy, but in principle they have to respect the laws of the countries they do business in, which has nothing to do with the EU extending laws beyond their borders.

Re:A really stupid overly idealist view you have.

[geminidomino]

A peaceful world will only come about when those who prey on civilians because of religious, ethnic, or other differences are eradicated.

So basically, when the poorly named Homo Sapiens is extinct.

Everyone

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I think this applies to everyone and we should all be worried. With the US Mentality of "your with us or against us!" you HAVE to support them. even if you want them all to fuck off and die, you can't say it out loud and sleep soundly at night. after starting two wars (I'm from the UK, so yes we helped...) and having a guy with more self confidence then sense in charge I'd rather keep my anti-yank opinions away from him in the political forum.

Maybe someone should teach Bush that there isn't only "us" and "them". Because mentality like that slowly chips away at "us" untill everyone is "them" and you're in a padded room going "THE VOICES TELL ME THEY ARE GOING TO BOMB US! THEY WILL BOMB US AND WE MUST GET THEM FIRST! IF WE DONT WE'LL ALL DIE! QUICK NUKE THEM ALL!"

Re:The terrorists did NOT come through Canada

[Anonymous Coward]

And the Algerians with the explosives? I suppose Allah just magic'd them at the boarder crossing where they were caught by a US customs official. Yeah, thanks for getting all your news from High Times.

Re:Canadians don't like the Patriot Act, eh?

[mwillems]

Easy to be admitted to Canada? When you actually READ that link, you will see there's no easy about it. Officers have to refer you to a board which they only do if you meet specific requirements and which they will NOT do if you meet other requirements (danger to security, criminal, already refused, and many others). None of these are a formality. In fact you will not even be allowed onto the plane to Canada in most countries without going through pre-inspection.

I am an engineer who moved to Canada 10 years ago from a wealthy European country. I have degrees, money, health, the language, everything I need inclduding a Cnadaina wife and two Canadian kids - and yet it took me a year and a half of laborious paperfilling to be allowed in. Believe me, refugees do NOT have an easier time of it.

Canadian email, for example...

[Obstin8]

Here's a disturbing example. Rogers Cable - Canada's largest cable ISP - recently outsourced all their customer-related provisioning to Yahoo; mail, web hosting, etc. By virtue of Yahoo being a US corporation, that means all Rogers Cable's customer's email automatically comes under the purview of the Patriot Act.

I have asked for clarification of this situation from Rogers but have not received a reply. As a Canadian I find it odious that my personal communications can be inspected by a foreign government without cause or warrant, and with no recourse to the law.

Both countries officially espouse 'due process of law'. For those of us looking in from the outside, it sometimes seems the US is working hard to change this to 'due process of erosion of privacy rights' (with a big side order of 'due process of corporate-profit enforcement' but that's another story).

If the tables were turned, and the Canadian government was trolling through American's e-mail accounts, the hue and cry from the south would be deafening. Right now, the only thing deafening is the silence as the American people allow their own government to trample the rights and freedoms that were bought and paid for in one Revolution, 2 World Wars, and countless other military and civil actions.

Don't get me wrong - I am not an Anti-American, as your media would have you believe all Canadians are. Hell, we all grew up watching the same TV shows and news programs, reading the same magazines, driving the same cars and eating at the same restaurants. We all swallowed the same propaganda.

That's why it's especially chilling to watch our neighbours sheepishly acquiesce to - or worse, actively endorse - these 'terror-busting' measures.

If American themselves can't identify and stop the erosion or elimination of their own rights, what hope does that leave for the rest of us?

Chilling, very chilling.

Re:The terrorists did NOT come through Canada

[spamfiltertest]

You mean there was never terrorists that tried to come from Canada to the US?

Re:hah Yeah canada is really free

[Anonymous Coward]

Paying your outrageous taxes ...so that people not as rich as myself can afford to live, yes. Something I do gladly.

only being allowed to purchase booze at state approved stores ...that operate pretty much like any other store. I have no trouble getting hammered either way.

nice central planning for health care. ...thus making sure we have affordable healthcare available to all.

Yeah Canada sure is a Socialist utopia.

So that's what they're teaching in your schools these days, is it? What you have mentioned has nothing to do with socialism. These things are the products of a civilized society founded on social libertarianism. The state leaves me alone unless I ask for help and that's exactly as it should be.

Idiots.

At least I'm happy, safe, well-off and not daily raped by my government.

Overacting

[Corbets]

Just some advice for people further down the line...

Yeah, the Patriot act gives some legitimate cause for concern to people (although I personally don't feel threatened by it). However, Slashdot comments (and some of the editors) are famous for seeing the worst case only and getting so worked up that no one will take them seriously. For example: No offense to Timothy, but I stopped reading his articles a long time ago, since I know exactly what his opinion will be on any given topic (oh, no, government is horrible!).

Many of the posts I've seen above made it sound like the PATRIOT act is the end of the world. One claimed that we now live in an Orwellian 1984-style society. We don't. Sure, mistakes will be made along the way, but it happens all the time. Even with the judicial process, innocent people get tossed in jail from time to time. It happens.

But increasing the government's power (while not something I'm in favor of) is not really a cause of that. The people that work for the government are still just regular joes like you and me who will try their best to be good and do their jobs well. Even if you're one of those left-wing wackos who believes that President Bush is the antichrist, remember that the hundreds of thousands of people who work for him will make their own decisions about right and wrong.

Too many people on Slash see the government (or corporations, for that matter) as big, faceless entities whose sole goal is power and the opression of the little people's rights. Believe it or not, that's not really the goal. So just take it easy with your comments here. Try to reason things out before you post so that we can have intelligent debates instead of spreading FUD about American laws.

And just for my 2 cents on topic, tough luck Canada. :) If you do business that crosses into our country, you need to be held accountable by our laws, whatever they may be. The same holds true in reverse - if we're doing business with your country, then once we, our product, or our communication crosses the border, it's susceptible to whatever laws you have up there.

Re:Overacting

[Nos.]

Nice comment. I'm Canadian, and yes, I think the PATRIOT Act goes too far, but I agree, its not quite at the level Orwell described in 1984.

And just for my 2 cents on topic, tough luck Canada. :) If you do business that crosses into our country, you need to be held accountable by our laws, whatever they may be. The same holds true in reverse - if we're doing business with your country, then once we, our product, or our communication crosses the border, it's susceptible to whatever laws you have up there

Some of us up north here agree with you completely. A company I have worked with is keeping an eye on this issue right now. Though most of the customers don't know it, some of their information/communication passes through the US. I have brought this issue up to this company, and I think its only a matter of time before the news starts picking this up.

A lot of companies in Canada are in similar situations. They've outsourced parts of their services to US based companies. The problem is with PIPEDA (Canadian Privacy Act). I believe it should be changed in one of two ways:

• Explicitly disallow a Canadian company from exporting any of the information protected in the Act
• Force companies to explicitly inform existing and potential customers that information held does pass outside the borders of Canada and thus outside the protection of PIPEDA

It is not the job of the US (or any other country) to enforce the laws and protections available to Canadians

Ruled by fear

[HangingChad]

The Patriot Act is rooted in fear. We had indications there were persons of interest in this country taking flying lessons before 9-11, we just didn't act on them. And don't blame the agents on the ground, they raised the warning. It was mid-management at the bureau who didn't take the reports seriously.

Before that it was almost 10 years between the first attempt on the WTC and the second.

So out of anger and fear we craft the badly misnamed US Patriot Act. An act that stomps on friend and foe alike, but hardest on our own people. We create yet another new massive federal bureaucracy to protect us. What do you suppose all those people at that massive new federal agency are going to do for the next 10 years to justify their existence? They're going to put their own people and friendly visitors through endless procedure and invasive, pointless snooping. All to try and find a handful of people patient enough to wait another decade or longer.

In some ways the terrorists have already won. How easily we're spooked into throwing over constitutional protections that used to be the envy of the world. Thousands died on the battlefield to protect those freedoms but what's that sacrifice to a generation that grew up under the coddled over-protection of those ridiculous Baby On Board signs?

I hope our friends to the north don't take it personally because it's not.

Re:The terrorists did NOT come through Canada

[kidlinux]

Well, the funny thing about the US accusing Canada of harbouring said terrorists is that the US are the ones that let them in to the US!

PATRIOT Act and Socialism in the US

[scorp1us]

Both share the fact that both were born out of paranioa.

PATRIOT came from Terrosit fears.

Socialism came from the great depression.

Everyone knows both are unconsitutional. The Patriot Act will be overturned in whole or in part, eventually, if enough people care. Socialism, particilarly Social [in]Security if nothing more than socialit welfare, which has no place in the United States.

Many people think that Social Security is a a sure thing. Recently, the only good thing to come from the Bush administration is the paranoia they are causing about its collapse. Reguardless of WHEN it will collapse, it WILL collapse. 2050 by my estimate. Al Gore chamioned a "locked box", Bush is pushing for private accounts. Why are they doing this? Because your SS (FICA) funds are deposited in the federal treasury, along with all the other tax money. Only the SSA knows how much you SHOULD get. Whether or not you get it is up to congress. Every year, Congress has to authorize the allocation from the treasury for SS. If Congress ever fails to allocate those funds, say for an economic or war crisis, no one on SSI gets thier money for that year.

Social Security is theft. It is the only insurance that you pay for that you don't know if it will be there when it is your turn.

I also object to SS on moral grounds. It enslaves our kids (YOUR KIDS, I don't have any) to pay for MY retirement. Do you think that is fair. Most would call it slavery.

Don't even get me startedon govt health insurance...

But anyway bak to the topic: We need a law that says no knee-jerk laws for 1 year after a catastripic event.

Here's a fact for you. Less than 5000 people died in the TWC. 15,000 people are killed in automobiles a year, over 1/2 by drunk drivrs. But you don't see us installing breathalizers in every car.

Re:In related news....

[mtrupe]

Wow.

So I guess you think freedom should be conditional? Freedom for people who think like you, but not like me? You scare me.

And to think, my comment is the one modded down as 'troll.' I think I'll stay away from these Slahsdot commies.

Pot-Kettle-Black

[cyberElvis]

"Thankfully, privacy still means something up here."

Oh, really? Is that why you have to register every gun in the country with the Canadian government or face charges?

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/06/30/gun_registry0 30630/

Re:Pot-Kettle-Black

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh, really? Is that why you have to register every gun in the country with the Canadian government or face charges"

Dude, you make it sound like "if you don't own a gun, you're an idiot" ... every time someone says something like this, it reinforces the reverse.

I [canadian] am so weary (sick and tired) of hearing about how your precious little guns empower you. If your 2nd ammendment rights instead said you had the right to mount a Hibachi on the dashboard of your car, would you mock the world for their stupid but safe Hibachi-less dashboards.

Yes, US, we like you. But in the world community you've become like that twitchy person that no-one wants to talk to unless they really have to. And you have a gun. Do the math.

Re:Pot-Kettle-Black

[Anonymous Coward]

And you have to get a driver's license in order to drive. What's your point?

With your knee jerking like that watch you don't hit yourself in the chin.

Since when are we Canuckistani?

[PhYrE2k2]

"As a Canadian, I just want to assure you that we do indeed refer to ourselves as being Canuckistani"

Since when are we called Canuckistani? I've lived in Toronto for over 20 years, and Halifax for over four. I have never even heard that 'word' in common speech, news, tv, print, jokes, etc. Never once. So since when is this something we refer to ourselves as?

Maybe you heard the word 'canuck' which is pretty common, especially on the parody-news shows such as 'this hour has 22 minutes' and 'royal canadian air farce', but Canuckistani?

This man/woman does not speak for the 32 million Canadians. Apparently nobody I know (through a quick poll) has heard of it either. Avoid the generalization. 'WE' do not use that term.

-M

Re:If you don't like it, don't visit here.

[Ced_Ex]

And, if memory serves, the terrorists that took down the WTC came through Canada.
Are we (the US) supposed to look the other way when it comes to Canada? It seems like we did in the past, and terrorists got through, took 4 jets, crashing 3 of them into buildings. What would you suggest?

If memory serves me correctly, Canada stuck its neck out for the US by accepting all those planes destined for US airports. How many more planes could have been filled with hijackers?

Check your facts about the hijackers.

Re:In related news....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm the one who modded you down as troll (hence my anonymous posting: I can't post under my username or my moderations will be undone). Your comment was clearly a troll / flamebait remark. You picked on the nuances of hate crime legislation (which I may not agree entirely with myself), purposefully ignored all the areas in which Canadians enjoy more freedom than the US, and then derived a ridiculous conclusion and stated it as truth.

If that isn't a trollish flamebait post, I sincerely don't know what is.

Furthermore, I'm entertained that you fail to see this, and have deemed me a commie in light of my moderation, despite the fact that you know nothing about me.

--Your friendly neighbourhood commie from the north.

The title's wrong...

[nmx]

Canadian Government Weary of Patriot act

I think the word you're looking for is wary.