[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] OT: Canada: Sweeping new surveillance bill to criminalize investigative journalism]
Why Brin is full of it, and reverse panopticon is a fantasy. - Forwarded message from David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 13:52:35 -0400 To: Ip Ip ip@v2.listbox.com Subject: [IP] OT: Canada: Sweeping new surveillance bill to criminalize investigative journalism X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Begin forwarded message: From: Tim Meehan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: September 21, 2005 1:25:07 PM EDT To: Drugwar [EMAIL PROTECTED], NDPot [EMAIL PROTECTED], CCC [EMAIL PROTECTED], Declan declan@well.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Canada: Sweeping new surveillance bill to criminalize investigative journalism http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=0a3f8b88-8c82-40d9-ad56-917d1af35e76 Pubdate: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sweeping new surveillance bill to criminalize investigative journalism, 'nanny cams,' critics say Bill makes it illegal to monitor children, document corrupt acts Cristin Schmitz The Ottawa Citizen Big Brother wants expanded powers to watch over you and yours, but Canadians who use their video cameras to conduct their own surveillance could risk prison under legislative measures the Liberal government is considering for this fall. As part of a planned bill that will hand sweeping new electronic surveillance powers to police, the federal government is also contemplating the creation of one or more new offences that would turn into criminals anyone who wilfully makes surreptitious visual recordings of private activity. The government is also looking at criminalizing any such activity that is done maliciously or for gain. Among those who could find themselves exposed to criminal jeopardy for currently legal activities are investigative videojournalists, parents who rely on hidden nanny cams to monitor their infants, the paparazzi and private investigators. The possible measures were unveiled earlier this year by government officials during closed-door discussions with selected groups and individuals. But the proposal has caused a stir among civil libertarian and legal groups who say the government has failed to provide evidence that such a broad new offence is needed, particularly in the wake of the new criminal voyeurism offence created by Parliament in the summer. Voyeurs are now liable to up to five years in prison if they surreptitiously visually record a person who is in a state of nudity or engaged in sexual activity in situations where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Toronto media lawyer Bert Bruser, a member of the Canadian Media Lawyers' Association, said his group was not consulted on the proposal for an additional new visual recording offence, even though it could have a dramatic impact on those investigative journalists who, for example, stake out politicians or other public figures to see if they are engaged in wrongdoing. I don't think anybody has thought about this proposal, I think it's hideous, Mr. Bruser remarked. He rejected the government's argument that because surreptitious wiretapping of private telephone conversations is illegal without a court order, Canadians should be similarly barred from surreptitiously capturing electronic images. The problem with legislation like that is when it uses terms like 'private activity' it creates a meaningless sort of phrase and nobody knows what it means, Mr. Bruser observed. Everybody wants to protect people's privacy these days, but I think that's far too broad and would very seriously hamper all sorts of journalism that is in the public interest, and that goes on all the time. Justice Department lawyer Normand Wong emphasized if the government moves ahead with a new visual recording offence, it will endeavour to craft an offence that isn't overly broad, but protects those principles that Canadians want to protect, and that's personal privacy, without interfering with legitimate practices like investigative journalism. But Bill Joynt, president of the Council of Private Investigators of Ontario, who also chairs a national umbrella group, complained the government has failed to consult with his membership. I haven't even heard of this. We haven't been consulted and we would like to be, he said. If there is not an exemption for private investigators, this would put us all out of business. Any surveillance we do is documented with video, and that includes insurance claims, Workers Safety and Insurance Board claims, both directly for the WSIB and employers, plus domestic investigations, and intelligence-gathering for corporate or criminal defence investigations. Mr. Joynt said private detectives already steer clear of surveillance in residences and other private places. What we would be concerned about is the definition of 'private activity,' he stressed. We are aware
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] OT: Canada: Sweeping new surveillance bill to criminalize investigative journalism]
At 8:46 PM +0200 9/21/05, Eugen Leitl wrote: Why Brin is full of it, and reverse panopticon is a fantasy. Obviously Brin is full of it -- from my own personal experience, even, :-) -- but one should remember that law, much less legislation, is always a lagging indicator. Physics causes finance, which causes philosophy, and all that. Even Stalin couldn't make Lysenkoism science. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
No, Canada!
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2004/11/06/no_canada?mode=PF The Boston Globe THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING No, Canada! You don't want to go there By Alex Beam, Globe Staff | November 6, 2004 You have probably heard the idle chatter: ''I'm thinking of moving to Canada. You may have received the JPEG Sent 'Round the World, labeling the northern part of North America -- the right-thinking part, as liberals would have it -- as the United States of Canada, and the pro-Bush leaning ''red US states as Jesusland. It sounds so alluring. Good beer. Cheap Viagra. Hardly any crime. Friendly, if somewhat ineffectual, people. Terrific, if underappreciated, novelists. (This means you, Rohinton Mistry.) Secure borders, courtesy of the US Department of Defense. But before you pack, consider this: There are plenty of reasons not to move to Canada. Let me count the ways. 1. They don't really want you. Canada is full of losers like you. If you're really rich, or a brain surgeon, maybe. But if you are, say, a newspaper reporter, be prepared to wait at least a year just to live there legally, and several more years to become a citizen. If you have some special qualifications, like a PhD, plus a lot of work experience, and if you are under 50, you have a better chance of crashing the gates of Snow Mexico. Or if you're loaded. That's right. If you have a net worth of $800,000 Canadian or more, and are willing to invest $400,000 of it in Canada, come on in! And you thought George Bush's America was a plutocracy. . . . Think again. 2. Speaking of brain surgery -- have you tried Buffalo? Here is what John Kerry didn't tell you: The problem with free, single-payer health care is that you get what you pay for. Even the Canadians acknowledge that their health system is in crisis. (Sound familiar?) They speak about the inequities of their two-tiered system, where publicly funded patients wait weeks, if not months, to consult specialists or have routine surgery, while private patients get quick service. In fact, it's a three-tiered system. The very well-to-do travel to the United States for some procedures. We refer you to a recent editorial in The Windsor (Ontario) Star: ''A growing number of sick and tired Canadians are beginning to look to the US for ideas on how to improve our failing health-care system. But Kerry, inexplicably, is looking north for health care ideas. 3. Parlez-vous francais? Somehow I doubt it. And yet if you want to work for the Canadian government -- the country's largest employer -- chances are that you have to be bilingual. And the private sector is following suit. C'est dur, eh? 4. How do you like your free speech -- well chilled? Canada has no First Amendment and adheres to primitive British-style libel laws. Here is a hilarious definition of defamation la Canadienne, from the Media Libel website: ''A defamatory statement exists if the publication tends to lower the plaintiff's reputation in the estimation of those who are commonly referred to as 'right thinking' members of society. Allow me to reiterate my widely known position: Celine Dion is the greatest singer who ever lived. Just this year, the Canadian Parliament passed what the religious right has branded a ''Chill Bill, or ''The Bible as Hate Speech Bill, effectively preventing churches from using the Bible to preach against homosexuality. ''With the passage of Bill C-250, Canada has now embarked upon a course of criminalization of dissent, according to a statement released this spring by the Catholic Civil Rights League. Fine, you say. Enough gay-bashing by Bible-waving Christian loonies. But remember John Ashcroft's motto: Your rights are next. 5. It's the black hole of sports fandom. You would seriously consider leaving the home of North America's greatest baseball team -- ever -- and of North America's greatest football team, for . . . what? Canadian football is played on a field that's too long (that's why each team has 12 players), and there are only three downs. Huh? Fifty percent of Canada's Major League Baseball infrastructure -- les Montral Expos just decamped for Washington, D.C., because of audience indifference. Canada's one great sports treasure, professional hockey, isn't being played this year. You hadn't noticed? And you can't even name its national sport, can you? What if that question is on the citizenship application? 6. Have you heard the joke about the Canadian dollar? Not lately. Without putting too fine a point on this, Canadian currency has been laying a Euro-style smackdown on the US greenback. What this means to you: less purchasing power. Wait, there's more. You think you're living in a high-tax state right now? Hahahahahaha. 7. The biggest argument against immigrating to Canada is: You're going in the wrong direction! With all due respect to our northern neighbors, anyone who is anyone bolted years ago. Peter Jennings, Mike Myers, Joni Mitchell, Jim Carrey
Re: No, Canada!
Fair enough. Canada is a role model for the US, as is the US for the world: nobody is wanted unless they are willing to pay for the mistakes and messes the locals have made, or best, work for starvation wages, usually off the books, long the prime source of penal-grade labor in the Echelon nations, not to say the, spit, Western and Eastern cultures -- out-sourcing has always been first in line right at home: wives, kids and the invisible caste-classes who swab your puke and dump your garbage and bail you out of the drunk tank. Contamination by settlement of North America (and man-woman marriage): pay for it, new immigrants (wives and kids), with cheap labor and keeping your thoughts very, very quiet, and don't bitch about master's eccentricities about sex. The first New World, as Old, settlers set these conditions for the natives and for anybody who came afterwards. That's how you succeed in the New Worlds, behave like Calvinist cum Libertarian cum Roman cum Roman Church pretend aristocrats: if you dont'have it you don't deserve it, but you can always steal it the legal way, stock market and tithe basket, praise Allah for his valorizing wealth as salvation. But, more of the defense budget goes for clean-up of its messes in the US than for military health-care and benefits (overseas it has hardly begun). The clean-up corporations are mostly the same ones which made the messes (this is the pattern since the Revolutionary War), and they are not doing the job worth a shit, overruns and performance failures as bad as for unworkable but richly bragged-about armaments. If the bitching about contamination gets too loud, why start another war. The DC-area is one of the most contaminated parts of the US due to the plethora of toxic-puking mil installations. One of the worst is under American University and surrounding neighborhoods, across Nebraska Avenue from the headquarters of Homeland Security, itself once home of the military's oldest comsec unit. As sleazy Hitchens and slews of other suck-ups of the rich and powerful have demonstrated, especially those predating from Canada: defend and flatter and amuse the privileged of the US-supremacist model of the New World as if the Old in new clothing, and you'll do quite well. But do not engage in dissent or your product won't move and your wise ass will be banished -- thanks to the scoundrels' patriotism embedded in the capitalist regime since day one.
Re: No, Canada!
At 11:42 AM -0800 11/6/04, John Young wrote: capitalist There you go, speaking marxist again... ;-) Cheers, RAH Capitalism is totalitarian for economics... -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Canada issues levy on non-removable memory (for MP3 players)
On Jan 11, 2004, at 8:24 AM, Adam wrote: I know this story is quite a bit old, but I really have to wonder how legal this levy is. http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/news/c20032004nr-e.html The Board also sets for the first time a levy on non-removable memory permanently embedded in digital audio recorders (such as MP3 players) at $2 for each recorder with a memory capacity of up to 1 Gigabyte (Gb), $15 for each recorder with memory capacity of more than 1 Gb and up to 10 Gbs, and $25 for each recorder with memory capacity of more than 10 GBs. It just seems to me to be a bit sketchy to tax intended illegal usage. I mean, that'd be like taxing condoms b/c of prostitution. Would something like this go over in the US? I wonder ... It already has, many times. Directly parallel to the Canadian tax is the tax on blank media for music recording, part of the Home Recording Act of 1991. (Or close to that year...Google for details if interested.) This tax was placed on blanks ostensibly to recompense recording artists for taped music. Less directly parallel, but certain sin taxes, are the various and very high taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, etc. And the exorbitant luxury taxes on various expensive things like certain kinds of jewelry, yachts, expensive cars, etc. And various shakedowns of casinos with special taxes, such as Schwarz nigger's demand that Indian casinos in California share their profits with the state to help with the deficit. And various collectivists and fascists have proposed taxes on ammunition, ostensibly to recompense victims for being shot. (Ignoring the fact that what it would do is penalize those who practice, shooting 200 or more rounds at a trip to the range, while having no effect on the typical gangsta negro or Mexican with less than one box of ammo to his name, but still using his piece to shoot several people. The recreational shooter ends up paying 99.9% of the tax, the gangsta pays a dollar or two per box.) The point is, the U.S. taxes what political animals call sin quite a bit. --Tim May
Re: Canada issues levy on non-removable memory (for MP3 players)
Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would something like this go over in the US? I wonder ... We allow congress to tell us that we can't have VCRs that don't respect Macrovision. I'm sure the sheeple would have no problem paying reparations for imaginary theft of imaginary property. -- Riad Wahby [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIT VI-2 M.Eng
Re: Marijuana once again legal in Ontario, Canada
Yeah - might want to hold off on that for now ... http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendlyc=Articlecid=1070925607028call_pageid=968332188492 -p - Original Message - From: Tim Meehan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:54 PM Subject: Marijuana once again legal in Ontario, Canada An unforeseen consequence of government incompetence. http://ontario.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=25324 TORONTO - Ontario Consumers for Safe Access to Recreational Cannabis is happy to inform consumers that, because of Health Canada's failure to implement constitutional Medical Marijuana Access Regulations, wide-open marijuana legalization is back in Ontario! The police will likely still have their 'business as usual' public relations line, but since Health Canada has defied the order of the Ontario Court of Appeal by not allowing a grower to supply multiple patients, as ordered, the MMAR is unconstitutional, said Tim Meehan, communications director of OCSARC. Because it's unconstitutional, that means that according to the Parker decision by the same court in 2000, the possession of marijuana law is dead once again. OCSARC reminds people that while they might still be arrested and prosecuted by police and prosecutors who refuse to acknowledge the status of the law, they may seek substantial financial compensation later. This is a notice to police that while they do have the power to arrest harmless marijuana smokers, they will be doing so at their own peril. Cannabis consumers will not allow themselves to be treated as second class citizens, and many will be armed with legal information and representation in case the harassment continues, said Meehan. OCSARC (Ontario Consumers for Safe Access to Recreational Cannabis) is a Toronto-based organization working to end prohibition and promote reasonab le and responsible regulation and quality assurance in the cannabis market.
Marijuana once again legal in Ontario, Canada
An unforeseen consequence of government incompetence. http://ontario.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=25324 TORONTO - Ontario Consumers for Safe Access to Recreational Cannabis is happy to inform consumers that, because of Health Canada's failure to implement constitutional Medical Marijuana Access Regulations, wide-open marijuana legalization is back in Ontario! The police will likely still have their 'business as usual' public relations line, but since Health Canada has defied the order of the Ontario Court of Appeal by not allowing a grower to supply multiple patients, as ordered, the MMAR is unconstitutional, said Tim Meehan, communications director of OCSARC. Because it's unconstitutional, that means that according to the Parker decision by the same court in 2000, the possession of marijuana law is dead once again. OCSARC reminds people that while they might still be arrested and prosecuted by police and prosecutors who refuse to acknowledge the status of the law, they may seek substantial financial compensation later. This is a notice to police that while they do have the power to arrest harmless marijuana smokers, they will be doing so at their own peril. Cannabis consumers will not allow themselves to be treated as second class citizens, and many will be armed with legal information and representation in case the harassment continues, said Meehan. OCSARC (Ontario Consumers for Safe Access to Recreational Cannabis) is a Toronto-based organization working to end prohibition and promote reasonable and responsible regulation and quality assurance in the cannabis market.
