Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Canada's Internet Surveillance Bill: Not Dead After All

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the not-so-fast dept.

Canada 53

First time accepted submitter Maow writes "Despite a recent story claiming that Canada's Bill C-30, covering internet surveillance, has died a 'lonely' death, the minister responsible claims otherwise. 'Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is denying reports that the Harper government intends to quietly shelve its controversial online surveillance bill, C-30.' Speaking to reporters on Wednesday morning, Toews insisted the legislation was moving ahead. He has previously stated this is the bill that you either support, 'or you stand with the child pornographers.'"

cancel ×

53 comments

bastards all! (1)

wasteoid (1897370) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022375)

except me of course

Better argument. (5, Funny)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022397)

He has previously stated this is the bill that you either support, 'or you stand with the child pornographers.'"

How lame. He needs to spice this up: Either you support his bill, or you are a child pornographer.

Now that has some zing.

Re:Better argument. (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022419)

Event better: Either you are child pornographer, or you don't support the bill.

Re:Better argument. (3, Insightful)

protocolture (2460898) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022537)

Only sith deal in absolutes.

Re:Better argument. (4, Insightful)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022545)

Well then it's even more fitting.

Re:Better argument. (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023077)

That would be, in most cases, far too easy to shoot down as slanderous. Not that I'm suggesting that what Mr. Toews was saying has any basis in reality, but what a person secretly supports or endorses, as opposed to something that they personally actually do, is much more susceptible to opinion, and therefore considerably harder to present infallible evidence to refute it.

Of course, the rhetoric that Mr. Toews used in his now highly publicized claim is widely known as poisoning the well [wikipedia.org] , and is usually considered a type of logical fallacy related to ad-hominem and appeal to ridicule (a special case of appeal to emotion). I have absolutely no doubt that this bill will be killed before the next election.

Re:Better argument. (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023599)

Yes, John Howard (ex-Aussie PM) used this tactic to great effect when he and the attorney general were undermining the rule of law in the David Hicks case. Howard continually reffered to Hicks as a "terrorists" and his critics as "Hick's supporters" despite the fact that most of them (including me) were supporting the rule of law and thought Hick's was a dickhead. It's one of the most shameful episodes in Australian politics I have seen in my 50 odd years, I cannot think of another case of political imprisonment by Australia that displayed such utter contempt for the basic rule of law as the Hicks case, and they got away with it by equating critics to terrorist sympathsers.

Re:Better argument. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40024379)

You're either against this bill, or you're with the nazi totalitarians.

There, we can play that game too.

Re:Better argument. (2, Insightful)

Phrogman (80473) | more than 2 years ago | (#40025335)

Well "Nazi Totalitarians" isn't that far off from our current Conservatives. Harper executes pretty strong control over all his followers, he is restricting free speech, attacking the environmental movement, supporting big business regardless of the effects on Canada or the cost to the public, organizing a police like state (with training at the G8/G20 session, minimum penalties for crimes, eliminating the concept of personal privacy for the citizenry, etc).

Re:Better argument. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40025193)

Even "or you are a child pornographer", if fully accurate, would put me in the child pornographer camp. Only when we reach the level of:
    "Either you support this bill or you partake in, support, and encourage violent child abuse"
does the choice start to become difficult.

Don't get me wrong, child abuse of any kind is very wrong; I just don't think it's quite as bad as the things this twat is trying to do.

Then I will stand with the child pornographers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40025527)

So to protect my freedoms or even just disagree with some boneheaded politician, I have to scar children for life now? And keep photographic evidence? And here I was, thinking that democratic process was civilised. Guess not, then. Now for a local kinky kids branch, where's the yellow pages?

Re:Better argument. (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 2 years ago | (#40026373)

As a Polly-tit-ian he should make the contents of his harddrive available for public report from a forensics tech.
Methinks "short eyes Toews" doeth protest too much...

Why don't you have a seat (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022415)

What's this bill doing here? Do you really think it's appropriate to bring this kind of legislation to a constitutional monarchy?

GodDAMN (5, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022429)

What an absolute fucking douchebag this guy is...

Also, judging from the picture in TFA, very likely a comic book supervillian as well...

Dr. Douche? Fagneto? Somebody help me out here...

Re:GodDAMN (5, Insightful)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022531)

What an absolute fucking douchebag this guy is...

In my experience, being a douchebag is a requirement for a career in politics.

Well, yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40022613)

Having power over so many people necessarily involves limiting at least some of them in ways they do not like.

Every man's freedom-from is a denying of another man's freedom-to.

His ex wives don't think much of him (4, Insightful)

kawabago (551139) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022731)

The condescending attitude of the government is beginning to bother most people. I personally don't like being talked down to by idiots.

Re:GodDAMN (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40023683)

What an absolute fucking douchebag this guy is...

Doesn't anyone else see that even if THE CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS think you're below them, then you must be some really awful form of scum?

Tit-for-tat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40022445)

Either you are against this bill, or you are a Nazi.

Re:Tit-for-tat (3, Insightful)

protocolture (2460898) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022547)

The Nazi child pornographers must be having a tough time picking a side in this debate.

Re:Tit-for-tat (2)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022785)

The Nazi child pornographers must be having a tough time picking a side in this debate.

Nah - Toews has it covered either way. Just like when he was banging the baby-sitter. Christian confession, everything okay, all is forgiven. Repeat a few years later, same routine. Fascists have no problem seeing themselves as "special exceptions."

Of course it's not dead (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022487)

It's just going to be snuck into the Harper Government's next omnibus novel^W bill

Re:Of course it's not dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40024421)

Citizen: Here's one -- nine bucks.
Toews : It's not dead!
Harper: What?
Citizen: Nothing -- here's your nine bucks.
Toews: It's not dead!
Harper: Here -- Vic says it's not dead!
Citizen: Yes, it is.
Toews: It's not!
Harper: It isn't.
Citizen: Well, it will be soon, it's very ill.
Toews: It's getting reintroduced!
Citizen: No, it's not -- it'll be stone dead by the next election.

Don't forget to push proportional representation at the next federal election, my fellow Canadians.

Internet surveilance of ALL GOVERNMENT (1)

SirAstral (1349985) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022491)

or you stand the with the child pornographers...

Someone needs to spit this line right back at them!

Canada's Internet Surveillance Bill: Not Dead Yet (4, Funny)

Em Adespoton (792954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022511)

Come on... the submitter should have been able to slip in the Python reference; it's extremely apt under the circumstances.

Speaker of the House: Bring out yer dead! [opposition puts a bill in the bin, unaware of the fact that the bill is actually in discussion]
        The Opposition: Here's one.
        Speaker of the House: That'll be ninepence.
        Bill C-30: I'm not dead.
        Speaker of the House: What?
        The Opposition: Nothing. [hands the collector his money] There's your ninepence.
        Bill C-30: I'm not dead!
        Speaker of the House: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
        The Opposition: Yes he is.
        Bill C-30: I'm not.
        Speaker of the House: He isn't.
        The Opposition: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
        Bill C-30: I'm getting better.
        The Opposition: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
        Speaker of the House: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
        Bill C-30: I don't want to go on the cart.
        The Opposition: Oh, don't be such a baby.
        Speaker of the House: I can't take him.
        Bill C-30: I feel fine.
        The Opposition: Oh, do me a favor.
        Speaker of the House: I can't.
        The Opposition: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
        Speaker of the House: I promised I'd be at the Liberals'. They've lost nine today.
        The Opposition: Well, when's your next round?
        Speaker of the House: Thursday.
        Bill C-30: I think I'll go for a walk.
        The Opposition: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
        Bill C-30: I feel happy. I feel happy. [The Speaker glances up and down the commons furtively, then whacks the bill with the his mace, solving the problem]
        The Opposition: Ah, thank you very much.
        Speaker of the House: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
        The Opposition: Right.

Re:Canada's Internet Surveillance Bill: Not Dead Y (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022635)

Nd here I was, all set to go with:

It's not dead yet!
It's just a flesh wound.
It's feeling BETTAH!

Story of my life. A day late & a dollar short...

It's more of a Game of Bills. (2)

MRe_nl (306212) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022663)

What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger.

Re:It's more of a Game of Bills. (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#40028481)

What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger.

I'm just surprised they aren't ramming it and other pet legislation through via the budget bill. That thing's already got more than the budget in it - it rewrites several laws as well. Given it's at least 5 separate pieces of legislation (1 of which is the budget), why not toss in a few more?

Poor Vic (3, Interesting)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022515)

He has previously stated this is the bill that you either support, 'or you stand with the child pornographers.'"

Damn, Vic -- must be tough. Most people actually think you are a greater threat than a child pornographer. I mean, I think you are a wildly irrational authoritarian with far more power to harm the Canadian populace than any person with your mind-set should have, but.... well... OK, maybe they're right. I guess you are more of a threat than a child pornographer.

Heh, I guess, maybe you should be careful with the comparisons you draw. You might just wind up on the wrong side.

Think of the Children! (5, Insightful)

AarghVark (772183) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022525)

Funny how people often use the excuse "think of the children" when asking you to give up your rights and freedoms.

I am thinking of the children. Children who will one day not enjoy the rights I had if I do not fight for those rights today.

Re:Think of the Children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40022903)

I've asked just this question in #tellviceverything. It must be that he's not worried about whether his children have to suffer the consequences of the totalitarian society they're building. I can only guess that there are ways for members of the government and their families to avoid being subject to these new laws.

If they're not diddlers then he wouldn't watch!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40024409)

In effect what he did was accuse every Canadian of being a kiddie diddler, and having this suspicion of diddling kiddies means that he needs to monitor them.

Conversely if he didn't think they were kiddie diddlers, then he wouldn't NEED to watch them. So the fact he needs to watch EACH and EVERY Canadian to prevent them kiddie diddling means he thinks that EACH and EVERY Canadian is worth the suspicion.

Harper hasn't sacked him, so he's certainly backing him.

Re:If they're not diddlers then he wouldn't watch! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40024843)

If you saw any of the news articles from the storm that was going on earlier it became evident that Vic actually never read the bill before introducing it. Someone handed it to him already written and just told him to introduce it to the house. Could have been Harper, one of Harper's minions or maybe someone to whom Harper is a minion.

One thing I notice is that it's deflected attention from another real threat in Bill C-11. This may be an even more pernicious bill dealing in copyright reform. It could spell out a situation where anyone listening to an MP3 player could be detained for suspicion of pirating music or other "intellectual" "property". (cain't quite decide whether such thing as can really be considered intellectual or property but as long as the government is paid off by the entertainment industry, they'll treat it as such.)

So really, if Bill-C-11 gets through, they'll also have enough power to get warrants for any information from any source they want in the form of supposed intellectual property theft.

This (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 2 years ago | (#40026351)

Funny how people often use the excuse "think of the children" when asking you to give up your rights and freedoms.

I am thinking of the children. Children who will one day not enjoy the rights I had if I do not fight for those rights today.

A thousand-fold this.

We should really ask him. (4, Interesting)

Sique (173459) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022643)

Are you for mandantory searches of all homes? No? So you stand with the child pornographers.
Are you for mandantory screening of all letters and packages? No? So you stand with the child pornographers.
Are you for mandantory monitoring of all private places? No? So you stand with the child pornographers.

If enough people state publicly that he obviously stands with the child pornographers, maybe his bill will lose support.

Re:We should really ask him. (1)

isopropanol (1936936) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023689)

Vic Toews probably does support mandatory warrantless searches of all homes, etc. That way he can find terrorist materials like gardening books.

Re:We should really ask him. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40023969)

If Vic visits my dwelling (a cave) all he will find is a face full of hurt. Gotta use those rusty nails from my former wooden dwelling (a house) for something and I am thinking of the children by recycling those rusty nails. ;) My fall-back defence is the swarm of "killer bees" that likes to hangout inside the cave on cooler days.

Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (3, Interesting)

hawkingradiation (1526209) | more than 2 years ago | (#40022691)

Yup, things are surely working out in the Canadian Parliament. What can you expect when these retards [youtube.com] get a majority. (In case you couldn't figure it out, he is talking about format shifting, which will probably become illegal after C-11 gets it 3rd and final reading sometime soon.)

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (2)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023123)

It won't become entirely illegal... it just won't be legal unless the copyright holder gives permission for it to occur (which implies that they would have to provide the tools or decryption keys necessary to accomplish it), or else not employ any form of digital lock at all, in which case the end user has all the conventional fair dealing privileges.

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40023773)

This is why you DO NOT buy anything that involves music or movies, as it will just temp you to become a criminal (per proposed law). Rent (zip.ca), pay-per-view (netflix.ca), etc, but DO NOT buy any more media.

I've stopped watching movies anyway. Books are a lot more entertaining any day and for that I can just use my local library. Content producers are directly getting exactly $0 from me these days. The library pays some money to authors as per the library laws in Canada, but that is acceptable.

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#40028201)

It'll be interesting to see if the various DVD ripping, copying, and resizing tools sold in stores today are still legal for sale post-C-11.

Our rights in Canada to transcode and back up media have been enshrined by the courts for decades (I remember hearing about cases when I was still in high school, and that's well over 30 years ago now.) The very idea that it's "illegal" to decrypt data in order to back it up goes against our established rights to transcode.

Search for the cases in the 70's and 80's involving people making cassettes of vinyl records to use in their cars and walkmans. It may not be digital transcoding, but those were the cases that established our rights.

And look into the CDR levy in Canada -- the "deal" that the music industry made to "tax" blank media in order to recoup their "losses" due to piracy. The net result of that sign-on was to make it legally acceptable for people to make copies of CDs for their own use, the same as had been previously the case for cassettes.

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40030897)

It'll be interesting to see if the various DVD ripping, copying, and resizing tools sold in stores today are still legal for sale post-C-11.

If they remove locks that the distributor put in place to prevent copying in the first place, then probably not.

And look into the CDR levy in Canada -- the "deal" that the music industry made to "tax" blank media in order to recoup their "losses" due to piracy

Actually, that's a (very) popular misconception. If you review the actual text of the levy's purpose, the levy actually exists only to compensate artists for completely legal private copying onto digital media. It is not a tax to compensate for piracy, since piracy is illegal, and it would be entirely illegal to tax people for activities that they are not allowed to legally do in the first place.

To that end, the conservatives, who support C-11, which prohibits the removal of digital locks, also endorse the elimination of the blank digital media levy. Under C-11, it makes sense to eliminate anyways, since the so-called legal private copying that consumers are being granted permission to do by the levy is effectively blocked by the circumvention prohibitions of C-11.

If the levy exists simultaneously with C-11, then the levy is being collected for something that the consumer will not even generally have the ability to legally exercise except with technologies that will only grow increasingly obsolete. The levy would thus become effectively illegal for the government to collect, and would have to be discontinued. Of course, this is under a post-C11, where it will be illegal to, for example, format shift that blu-ray movie to your tablet computer unless the manufacturer said you could... so it's hardly all good.

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (2)

caseih (160668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40024899)

According to Michael Geist, C-11 is a mixed bag, some good, some bad. Almost all of the demands of the copyright lobby were soundly rejected by committee. However other things that are bad remain, including legislation on digital locks.

But yes, I agree whole-heartedly about the state of affairs. The Conservative Republican party of Canada is arrogant and power hungry. I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between interviews with Canadian federal ministers and Republican congressmen, both in tone and content.

Their local affiliate in Alberta, the PC party, isn't much better by any means. Both at the federal level and provincial level, they win by promoting fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Unfortunately the masses seem to go along with this over and over again, all the while complaining about how corrupt things are. Either we have election fraud on a massive scale or else it's mass ignorance or fear or something. It doesn't help that the opposition self-destructed.

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (2)

Painted (1343347) | more than 2 years ago | (#40028405)

Actually, I'd argue that the Alberta provincial PC Party has moved (comparatively) centrist with their new leader. So much so that the more right wing elements were up in arms enough to do the usual take-their-ball-home conservative political party split (Alliance, Tea-Party) and formed the Wild Rose Party, a super-right wing party that basically said that they'd crap all over the urban centres to please their rural neocon masters.

Polls had them getting a solid majority, with up to 40% popularity, right up until the recent election. Fortunately for the rest of us, the 'undecideds' came out en mass and thumped them soundly, giving the PC's the province once again... hooray for reasonableness. Though I can hardly believe I just used the word 'reasonable' in describing any modern political process or outcome...

Re:Yeah, Canadian democracy at its finest (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 2 years ago | (#40033583)

Polls had them getting a solid majority, with up to 40% popularity, right up until the recent election. Fortunately for the rest of us, the 'undecideds' came out en mass and thumped them soundly, giving the PC's the province once again... hooray for reasonableness. Though I can hardly believe I just used the word 'reasonable' in describing any modern political process or outcome...

Because it wasn't reasonable. Albertans handed the reins back to the corrupt PC party because they were petrified of the Wildrose. Hell, the PC were selling themselves as "centrists and leftists should vote for the us so the Wildrose doesn't get in". It was pure devil-you-know scare tactics and it was ALL they had.

A reasonable alternative would have been a diminished right and a strengthened left, not the other way around. It pains me to say that as someone who's right-leaning, but they were rotten and needed to go down. Instead, the PC has a bogeyman to scare voters with for at least the next two elections. (And them they'll probably merge with it.)

all you fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40023375)

You lot just had to remind our shitty government about this bill.

The Real Problem with Bill C_30 (2)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023871)

The Real Problem with Bill C_30 is Sections 33/34:

Vic's Asst. 1: So have we had any luck tracing that person who sent those emails or who he is working with. You know the other people he has been in contact with.

Vic's Asst. 2: Nope. All we have is the email address but that does give us the name of their ISP.

Vic's Asst. 1: OK so get a warrant for that ISP and find who it was that sent it along with who he is working with.

Vic's Asst. 2: Can't do that. What was done was not a criminal act.

Vic's Asst. 3: Well then how about this. We get the Minister to appoint someone we trust as his agent as per Section 33 to check out this ISP for compliance to Bill C-30. They go there and then once they are in the ISP's premises we use Section 34, which states he can make copies of 'any' information found at the site regardless of where it is stored, to get everything. That gives us all the ISP's user account data as well as the contents of all current user emails, instant messages, voice over IP conversations as well as all the system backups which will contain everything even if has been deleted by the users. Then we bring it all back here and go through it at our leisure looking for 'compliance violations'.

Vic's Asst. 1: And that is legal?

Vic's Asst. 3: Getting it yes, mind you searching it could get the Minister into trouble but then hey isn't what Senate appointments are for.

Vic's Asst. 1: Ok then, works for me.

Quietly Pass It (2)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | more than 2 years ago | (#40023931)

Perhaps before this guy opened his mouth, rather than trying to let it die a quiet death, they were trying to quietly pass it.

Greater of Two Evils (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40024105)

The politicians say this and make the child pornographers seem more relateable. This reminds me when W. said you're either with us, or with the terrorists, and without blinking I said "Terrorists." I'm certainly not happy to be on the same side as the terrorists and child pornographers, and hate the politicians even more for forcing me to do so.

Do they really believe the average person thinks of them as Saints?

black and white (2)

MadMaverick9 (1470565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40024277)

in response to mr toews comment "this is the bill that you either support, 'or you stand with the child pornographers.'".

Life isn't black and white. It's a million shades of grey. [families.com]

what mr toews needs to learn here is that there is at least one more opinion: i do not support child pornography and i do not support a surveillance society.

govts all over the world - stop giving us these black and white choices. it ain't that easy.

Time to bring back #TellVicEverything (1)

Galestar (1473827) | more than 2 years ago | (#40024589)

Email him every mundane detail of your life... or just cc him on everything: vic.toews@parl.gc.ca

Pedo's are the new Hitler - Call Godwin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40025121)

I do stand with the Child Pornographers in their stance against arson, euthanasia, and whether or not 2+2 is 4.

I stand with Hitler in his belief that vegetarianism is a healthy diet.

What in the hell kind of argument is he making, because I don't want easy, totalitarian government surveillance methods and approval I'm a pedo, because they agree with me?

Well, I guess he also stands with Hitler then, on far more substantive and dangerous matters than where I stand with kiddie pornographers.

Tell Vic Everything (3, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#40026191)

Seems like we shoud resume the "Tell Vic Everything" campaign. If Vic is really that interested in spying on everyone, then make it easier for him.

- Add @ToewsVic to every tweet you send.
- Start posting your breakfast details on his Facebook page.
- CC him on every email you send using all his addresses (note they made him new ones after the last campaign - vic.toews@parl.gc.ca / toewsv1@parl.gc.ca / Toews.V@parl.gc.ca )

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/16/pol-twitter-tell-vic-everything.html [www.cbc.ca]

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...