Slashdot Mirror
The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill
An anonymous reader writes "Canada's proposed
anti-terrorism legislation is currently being debated in the
House of Commons, with the government already serving notice that it
plans to limit debate. Michael Geist argues that decision has enormous privacy consequences, since the bill
effectively creates a "total information awareness" approach that
represents a radical shift away from our traditional understanding
of public sector privacy protection. The bill permits information
sharing across government for an incredibly wide range of purposes,
most of which have nothing to do with terrorism and opens the door
to further disclosure "to any person, for any purpose." The
cumulative effect is to grant government near-total power to share
information for purposes that extend far beyond terrorism with few
safeguards or privacy protections."
I guess I can't threaten to move there anymore as the US pot boils over.
Welcome to the modern day fascist state. Privacy is a luxury no longer afforded to everyday citizens.
The wording is sufficiently vague to permit a Canadian Security Intelligence Service investigation of anyone who challenges the Conservatives' social, economic or environmental policies, the Opposition leader said during the daily question period.
"What's to stop this bill from being used to spy on the government's political enemies?"
Prime Minister Stephen Harper dismissed the suggestion, telling the House of Commons the NDP had entered the realm of conspiracy theory.
"That's what we've come to expect from the black helicopter fleet over there." - http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/poli...
They're quick to tell us how this is going to make us more secure, but they've utterly failed to demonstrate how existing laws are inadequate, or that these news laws would have helped at all in anything they've missed.
This is the drooling "we need to give the security people the tools to do their job", while ignoring the legal protections we're supposed to have, and failing to justify these new powers.
And, of course, the government spokesman said how this proposal was met well by the other people in the "five eyes" ... of course they're going to love it, they get a share of the fucking take.
We don't give a shit about what a foreign government thinks about our security and information sharing, because they greedily want this shit.
We give a shit about the fact that this is illegal, unnecessary, completely unjustified, and completely lacking in proper checks and balances.
This is a government operating on a "law and order" agenda who doesn't give a fuck about the law.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
We're losing our freedoms and rights here pretty badly, but nothing quite yet as bad as this sound like in CA.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
It's amazing how one man can so completely destroy a country, both politically and culturally in under a decade. The CRA (the Canadian version of the IRS) is currently doing audits of non-profit organizations and revoking the non-profit status of organizations that have political ideologies that go against the Conservative agenda.
Dying with Dignity loses charitable status after political activity probe
7 Environmental Charities Face Canada Revenue Agency Audits
I can't wait for the next election and I sincerely hope the PC's are so savagaley beaten at the polls that they'll be laughed out of town on the oil wagon they rolled in on.
So.. Uh.. Yeah. Its this letter.
I don't know how to say this, but you should get yourself tested.
Here in the US we've got a bad case of the conservative stupid and it looks like you've caught it to. If you're lucky you can stave off the stagnating wages, crumbling infrastructure, tyranny of the banking sector, and jingoistic warmongering.
Love, the USA
You need to re-read the PATRIOT act.
In the US we have a balance of power that few people understand. We have an executive, a legislative, a judicial, and the fourth equal power which is the public and all have a defined limit to their powers. That is an upward limit as well as a downward limit. So the public is restrained by the Constitution just like any other part of the balance of powers. Electronic communications are new and unforeseen in our founders' eyes. Yet there should be no assumption at all that the public must yield some of their share of powers at all simply because something new comes along. In essence if the executive, the legislative, or the judicial system are not wide open to communications then the public has the right to privacy just as much as any branch or even the military or CIA has any right to secured communications. Or the government has the option to make all communications and data acquisition open to all of us without exception. The practical aspects of such a thing should not be a factor in a court ruling. Essentially the constitution is what it is and that could even include it being a mutual suicide pact. If a practical solution type of society was our goal we would be tossing people in the ovens and slaughtering anyone who made ripples in the pond or was to weak to supply all of their own needs. If little Johny shows up at the emergency room with a broken spine we try to do the best we can for little Johny. In a practical society we would simply shoot Johny in the head and toss his body in the city dump or use his corpse to feed the pigs. In other words you really do not want to live in a practical society as you just might be Johny one day.
Who do I need protection from?
No, it's a feedback loop. The exact same thing is happening with copyright.
America (and all of the five eyes) want additional laws and powers. Those laws and powers are currently illegal and unpopular.
So, one of the five eyes gets talked into passing a law which goes much further. And then the rest of them all say "see, we need these powers too".
The exact same thing has been happening with copyright, and spying provisions ... they play off one another to expand the powers internationally, and then push to get the same things domestically.
Essentially most western governments now have three magic keys to the kingdom: copyright, terrorism, and child porn.
These three things are being used to march the goalposts further down the field, and the consequences for the rest of our liberties be damned.
The five-eyes are flunkies in advancing the interests of corporations, and conspiring together to give us global fascism and surveillance. The Western democracies are all actively trying to say "fuck you and your rights, this is what we do, this is who we share it with, and if you don't like it fuck off".
Essentially the governments and spy agencies of the five-eyes are larger threats to our liberties than the people they claim to be protecting us from.
And they seem to not give a damn what they do to get there.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I used to think Canadians - even those out in the forsaken, endless prairies - were far more wise and progressive than us USians, but no. How long has GOP-backed and advised Harper been in power now? What happened? Was it tar sand greed? Pure apathy? The assumption they were all as 'funny' as Laughable Bublefuck Rob Ford?
Quite sad; I thought the Canadians were better than, well, just about everybody, but now no different than the rest of the Right-Wing Police State, Might Makes Right, Western world. [le sigh]