The non conformer's Canadian Weblog

November 23, 2009

Inevitable reality POLICE STATE

 
 
Undeniably now  firstly the bad Security Minister Con Vic Toews who tended to sleep with the bad cops resigned next because of his false attempts to pass this bad bill
.  
The bill,  which was expected to be passed unanimously, would require ISPs to report tips on websites providing child pornography, as well as informing police if they believe a child-porn offence has been committed using their Internet service.
.
Similar legislation already exists in the United States, and Canadian child-protection advocates have been calling for similar action in Canada. In June, Canada’s federal ombudsman for victims of crime called for rules requiring ISPs to reveal to police the names and addresses of customers suspected of posting child pornography, and to keep long-term records of where customers have been surfing.
Under the guise of pornography keeping  permanent  long-term records of where all  customers have been surfing is a start of a police state. The ISPs are already also keeping copies  of all of the customers email sent too. And we know that our digital phone calls are also monitored and recorded.. and no court approval used ehh..
Ironic if I wanted to be sure the government acted on a matter I used to like to phone the local news editors and leave my message on his answering machine, knowing the government likely had it bugged.. and often I got quicker results  next too..
 .
Remember the Conservative US president Robert Nixon and Watergate, and how History often repeats itself. If PM Stephen Harper believes in  and enforces our free speech he certainly now never shows it, he already had used the RCMP to try to shut up the news reporters as we know..
 
 
Now about this child porn Bill..
 .
I’m a little confused about the point of this law. Child pornography is already illegal. Not reporting a crime is also illegal. So if an ISP knowingly harbors child pornography, then can’t they already be charged? 
.
You cannot force private companies to do work for you because you’re lazy and don’t want to jump through your own hoops, that pretty much says it all if you think about it, and besides , all these idiots are doing is trying to sneak in the backdoor and see what you’re doing in the privacy of your own home , including your bedroom ….   sure child porn is bad, but putting the jackboots to the internet is nothing more than a disingenuous attempt at information muzzling/censorship.
.
Next thing you know, any site that questions the actions of the government will be censored under threat of putting the ISP out of business. BTW there are so many ways to circumvent the monitoring it boggles the mind……the criminals will use encryption…..how do you propose to monitor that..??. Are you going to crack the encryption…..or outlaw it?? What about the use of proxies….what are you going to do there? Do you even know what fricken proxy is?? Shows the intelligence level of our current government… pfft…. morons  In a country as hungry for fascism as today’s Canada, before long we will all be deputized as little block watch captains and required to police the behaviour of our neighbours — or face punishment as criminals ourselves. Quick, citizen, report your neighbour before he reports you!  And see that you behave yourself, because your neighbours are all peeping through their net curtains at you, their fingers poised on the speed dial buttons on their phones, ready to report you for the the slightest exhibition of what they regard as unusual behavior – because if they don’t report you, you will report them!  The problem with this recommendation is that you can’t oppose it without appearing to be somehow in favour of child pornography. Let’s assume for the moment we all agree that it’s a revolting practice that should be stamped out. The problem is that the role of the ISPs is simply to provide a link from a computer to the world wide web. That’s it. As soon as you turn them into monitors, suddenly they can be seen as responsible for the content of literally millions and millions of sites.  However it’s a rather slippery slope to start putting private companies in charge of monitoring the entire web, and I while I completely support the current move, I can see this step advancing well beyond the “pass on complaints” and would strongly opppose that increase in responsibility . Further more what business do ISP’s have policing the internet, should car dealers hand out speeding tickets now too?   With this, the ISPs will simply report every innocuous thing that they can. They will react to the governments foolish law What I am saying is that imposing a duty on businesses to snoop on their customers, and threatening jail time for failure, is obscene in the context of what people face for crimes of commission. And why is this any different than expecting a car manufacturer to do jail time if their products are used in a child abduction, and they don’t alert police? ( I dislike this federal juetice Minister Nicholson more and more each time he opens his stupid mouth) by overwhelming them with every piece of information possible, of which around 99.999% will be useless. The police will be overburdened, and we will be two steps back, not forward. I know don’t know how much it will help authorities to find the suspects but one thing for sure .. there will a new charge on my internet bill CPMC(Child pornography monitoring charge) and they will tell me that it’s a government fee. Is it worth the violation of our rights and freedoms… to privacy, to associate, to communicate in private. 1984 under the guise of a child protection law. This is a bad law and should not be accepted by anyone. The police already have all they need at their disposal with the issuance of court ordered warrants. This law is much more nefarious than people are being led to believe and it is no surprise that it is coming from Harper and his neo-clowns. what were the alternatives to this (probably useless) scheme. I’m not against strong laws against child pornography, I’m against pointless laws that are passed simply so a party or Parliament in general can be seen being tough on crime without actually doing much of anything at all. Either this government is unbelievably ignorant or their sick enough to exploit children to pass their hidden agenda. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/11/24/isp-mandatory-child-pornography.html
,
In no way do I wish to support those who deal in child pornography and exploitation, but this bill ALSO represents a serious change in the relationship between ISPs and privacy laws. I’m concerned that the Conservatives are using a non-debatable issue like child pornography to pave the way for stricter anti-piracy laws like those we’ve seen proposed in England. http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/11/23/internet-child-pornography-isp-bill.html
,
 
Child porn law a small help  The Cape Breton Post.,  Critics of the federal Conservative government tend to take a skeptical view of its war on crime, interpreting much it as a political play for easy applause, claiming exorbitant credit for measures that will have modest effect. A new bill aimed at tightening the rules on Internet traffic in child pornography is susceptible to the same criticism but Canadians are likely to overlook this and approve any useful step to impede of a heinous trade.
,
Recent findings on child porn activity are shocking. Steve Sullivan, Canada’s federal ombudsman for victims of crime, reports that child sexual abuse is growing an “alarming” rate, along with criminal charges for the production and distribution of child porn (up 800 per cent between 1998 and 2003). There are more and more images available featuring younger and younger children and increasing violence. The Canadian Centre for Child Protection, which operates the tipster site Cybertip.ca, found in its analysis of Internet child porn images that more than three-quarters of them featured at least one image of a child younger than eight years and many showed infants or toddlers. In a survey of 800 websites in 60 countries, the centre placed Canada in the top three (after the U.S. and Russia) in hosting websites with child abuse images, and second behind the United States in hosting sites that sell images of children being sexually abused. Experts hasten to point out that in most cases the operators of these sites are nowhere near Canada but they choose to operate through Internet facilities in this country in part because of our comparatively lax laws on electronic traffic in child porn. Canada figured in a disproportionately large nine per cent of the worldwide traffic. The new law, introduced in Parliament on Tuesday, will require Internet companies – Internet service and email providers, as well as content hosting and social networking sites – to report to a designated agency tips they receive about child porn activities through their facilities and to notify police when they believe criminal traffic in child porn is occurring. They will be required to preserve evidence as well. There’s already a voluntary system like this in place among major Internet service providers in Canada but this makes the practices mandatory for all. Internet service providers don’t monitor the content of traffic so the system will continue to rely on tips and complaints. This in itself won’t make a big dent in the torrent of child porn swill available worldwide but it will give police and anti-child porn agencies such as Cybertip.ca some more chances to pick up the threads of networks and rings, and possibly even to rescue a few more children from horrific situations. The Internet has transformed modern life in many positive ways. The explosion of electronic child porn is the outstanding example of the cost of this. If some principles of privacy and freedom have to be qualified to reduce that cost to the children of the world, so be it. http://www.capebretonpost.com/index.cfm?sid=305781&sc=151

Federal government introduces mandatory child porn reporting legislation  By Michael Geist

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson today tabled the Child Protection Act (Online Sexual Exploitation). As widely reported, Bill C-58 creates a mandatory disclosure requirement on Internet providers where they become aware of child pornography websites or have reason to believe a subscriber is using their service to violate child pornography laws. Where an Internet provider submits a report on a user, they must preserve the relevant computer data for 21 days and they are prohibited from disclosing the disclosure to the customer. Failure to report may result in fines or imprisonment and providers are granted immunity from liability for reporting the activity. The definition of Internet provider is broad, extending beyond just ISPs to include those providing Internet access, hosting, or email services. In other words, services like Google, Hotmail, and Facebook are all covered.
,

The bill shares similarities with provincial laws (ie. Ontario) and those that report under the provincial law are exempt from the federal version. While few will criticize a bill targeting child pornography – everyone agrees that child pornography is abhorrent and we need to ensure that we have laws to deal with the problem – it is hard to see what this bill actually accomplishes. Canada already has:

• an online child pornography tip service that receives thousands of tips

• ISPs that block access to child pornography images

• some of the toughest child pornography laws in the world

numerousexamples of childpornographyarrests

• law enforcement focused on child pornography virtually to the exclusion of all other online issues

Further, while there are reports that Canada is a source of child pornography websites, a major European-based study concluded that focusing on the World Wide Web and blocking content makes little sense in trying to combat child pornography (the same report found that image blocking initiatives like the Canadian Project Cleanfeed are ineffective). Instead, the real problems lies in dissemination of child pornography in newsgroups, private groups, and other private spaces that fall largely outside the potential for tips envisioned by Bill C-58 or Canada’s Project Cleanfeed.

,

Michael Geist is a law professor and the Canada Research Chair in Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa.  http://www.straight.com/article-271907/vancouver/federal-government-introduces-mandatory-child-porn-reporting-legislation

,

Giving more money to the police does not increase justice rather it tends to make a police state instead.. putting more bad cops in Jail and firing them is the start of real Justice now rather too.

.

In response to sex harassment allegations, RCMP drafts a unenforced new code of conduct  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/in-wake-of-sex-harassment-allegations-rcmp-drafts-new-code-of-conduct/article14283191/

.

Crown files appeal in RCMP officer’s acquittal in Dziekanski perjury case
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/crown-files-appeal-in-rcmp-officer-s-acquittal-in-dziekanski-perjury-case-1.1451975#ixzz2emRCQf2m

.

Toronto police officer guilty of assaulting G20 protester Adam Nobody  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/toronto-police-officer-found-guilty-of-assaulting-g20-protester-with-weapon/article14272231/

.

It is billed by the London Police Department Chief as “the best (shooting) range in Ontario.” At $22 million, it is certainly modern but one of the features might sit poorly with judges and civil libertarians.  While police can shoot a fleeing suspect that presents an imminent threat to the public, it is relatively rare in most crimes and raises obvious questions under Tennessee v. Garner. The entire project will ultimately cost $32 million and the facility’s gun range is billed as training officers to do a range of shooting,
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/12/09/canadian-police-department-builds-new-firing-range-that-helps-train-officers-how-to-shoot-fleeing-suspects/
.
Hypocritical Police and Conservatives want more policing over the Canadian citizens, the same persons who wrongfully firstly do not want to give us a detailed list, copy of all of their own expense accounts  and do note that too. Let the police rightfully start with the rightful better policing of themselves  and next deal  first with  our too often stealing, crooked, lying politicians, civil and public servants who also do steal  and now first also go after all the alcoholics who abuse their spouses, drive impaired … the cops included..  deal first with all  of  the  the persons who abuse any seniors.. and we now do need more cops rather in the hospitals arresting also all of  the bad Health Ministers, bad  doctors and bad nurses who fail to provide adequate medical aid to seniors, others etc
,
People in leadership office do have to face higher penalties as an example now too. It is clearly established, accepted fact by most people that those in leadership civil and public servants cops, teachers, ministers, politicians included  are always to be exemplary in behavior,  conduct and they do need to maintain their high standards even out of their working hours, thus to do so they are also to be exemplary  judged, prosecuted  for their own wrong doings with a higher standard over those of us ordinary folks.
.

Meanwhile  a Toronto doctor is facing a disciplinary hearing over allegations he approved special meal allowances for people on welfare and disability programs according to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.  Dr. Roland Wong,  said he continues to approve applications for the special diet but only if he believes patients have an underlying medical condition that qualifies them for the financial supplement.  “Today, I signed maybe five, four,” he said. “Sometimes more, depends.”  He accused the auditor general of having a very “slanted view” of the program, and suggested he should be looking instead at the woefully inadequate support payments paid to people in need.  Wong said he wasn’t overly concerned about the disciplinary hearing because it was based on a complaint laid against him by a municipal councillor.  “This is a case of politicians against a physician, not the patient against the physician,” he said.  The Special Diet Allowance provides up to $250 per month to a person on social assistance who requires special foods for such conditions as diabetes.  Councillor Doug Holyday said  . “This can’t go on.”  http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/torsun/091209/canada/doc_faces_probe_over_dietary_payouts

.

Quebec and other provinces have no such adequate help program and why?

.

What I think about our too often bad cops???

 

SEE 
 
 

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: