WARNING! This Blog Contains; Personal Opinion, Parody, Humour, Satire, Sarcasm, Criticism, Incredulity, Contempt, Indignation and/or Expletives. It also Contains a Huge Number of Rather Surprising Facts About the Oddly Dysfunctional Nature of Harper Land.

CHECK BACK OFTEN ~ ALL POSTS are Updated As New Information Becomes Available.

February 23, 2012

You Either Side with Vic Toews ~ Or You Side with Democracy

One of these days he is gonna slip and tell us everything!

We have three years to get From "Anonymous"
to Nearly Unanimous.

I signed a petition site and got this in my inbox, as did many. A well written and probably expensive list of Reform Talking Points. Pure PMO!

I got one from Vic, signed "Vic", Some got them from their own MPs signed by those MPs. That in itself is OK, but they all pretend to be people and not huge staffs.

By the Way, the name 'Toews' is pronounced 'Taves' and taves are defined as staff members in most dictionarys.

Sorry to ramble, but now that Vic has asked, me directly, I just gotta #TellVicEverything.

FROM: vic.toews.c1@parl.gc.ca
 Talking points

Thank you for contacting my office regarding Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.

Canada's laws currently do not adequately protect Canadians from online exploitation and we think there is widespread agreement that this is a problem. 

We want to update our laws while striking the right balance between combating crime and protecting privacy. 

Let me be very clear: the police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge and we have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners.

What's needed most is an open discussion about how to better protect Canadians from online crime. We will therefore send this legislation directly to Parliamentary Committee for a full examination of the best ways to protect Canadians while respecting their privacy.

For your information, I have included some myths and facts below regarding Bill C-30 in its current state.


Vic Toews
Member of Parliament for Provencher

Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.

Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change. 

Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.

Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing.  Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.

Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.

Fact:  As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.

Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.

Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.

Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.

Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.

Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.

Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.

So now we are to believe that Vic has been hitting the books? Am I or you to believe that Vic wrote, or even read this email? Well, so much for myth number one.  I still have not Really heard from Vic.

I will be responding to it A S A P, but I am conferring with the online community.

Look at the pretty picture I drew.......  I'll be back.

Franchises are Available at This Blog's Facebook Page

In Just got this from a friend that shall be 'C.L.'. 
They made their own Fact/Myth sheet and sent it along to Vic. I'm sure there are many other points people can add.

Fact:   Bill C-30 gives the government permission to follow your internet activity without a warrant.

Myth:  This Bill is needed to apprehend child pornographers.

Fact:   This Bill is created by the same government that was in charge of the G-20 when a thousand people were detained without cause.

Myth:   People who oppose this Bill are Child Pornographers.

Fact:   This Bill is being promoted by the same government that refers to environmentalists as terrorists.

Myth:   You can trust this government with expanded surveillance.

Fact:  This Bill has the potential to hurt free speech and association. The Internet is a powerful tool for organizing political action.

Myth:   You should be very afraid of everyone and everything.

Fact:  Crime in Canada is decreasing.

Myth:   Implementing the Surveillance Bill will cost about $80 million

Fact:   It will undoubtedly cost more. This government spares no expense to maintain control.

Myth:   Vic Toews knows what he’s talking about.

Fact:   This Bill has no place in a democratic society..

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are the lifeblood of a successful blog. Please feel free to comment, whether or not you are in agreement with the opinions expressed.