Mud fight over C-30 clouding real issues

Up to this point I have refrained from commenting on the kerfuffle surrounding Vic Toews and his internet bill simply because I don’t consider myself qualified to discuss all the ramifications with any degree of authority.

However I would like to point out the Minister Toews has a letter in today’s National Post in which he attempts to explain the intent of the legislation. Here is an excerpt:

…There has been a lot of misinformation recently thrown around, which I would like to correct. First, there is no provision in the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act that would allow police to read email without a warrant issued by a judge. Nothing in the proposed legislation would change that reality.

What the bill would do is allow police to obtain basic information about an individual when the police are engaged in a lawful investigation. While reasonable people could disagree on this point, most would not object to the idea of linking a phone number to a person’s name. That’s how a basic phone book works right now…

As usual both sides in this debate can be accused of excessive rhetoric in trying to make their point.

However, the whole thing took on a more sinister tone when the personal attacks on Minister Toews began to develop. In fact the situation is snowballing with the Hacker group Anonymous jumping into the fray just as Vikileaks is shutting down.

Some opposition MPs like Wayne Easter basically endorsed the online assault.

But as today’s National Post editorial points out, this type of attitude is further debasing Canadian politics and could even affect the privates lives of the opposition MPs themselves if any of them ever form government – What Vikileaks hath wrought:

 Rightly or wrongly, to embrace, promote or even acknowledge Vilikeaks – as a remarkable number of opposition MPs have done – is to accept yet further debasement of the Canadian political conversation. There is no way around it. The ends may justify the means in some people’s minds, but all politicians’ private lives are less private today than they were on Monday.

 

This whole episode is making Canadian politics look increasingly like the mean-spirited antics that go on in the U.S. which is regrettable.

And beyond that, we’re really not dealing with the true victims here – the children who are being sexually abused online – often in real time.

There may be an legitimate concern that hackers could access the information. Necessary steps should be taken to ensure this doesn’t happen – to the best of our ability.

However we must put aside the nasty rhetoric and get this right.

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater isn’t an option.

*   *   *   *

Update

Things not looking very good for Minister Toews on several fronts:

After careful consideration, Vic Toews sides with ‘child pornographers’ – Matt Gurney, National Post

Reports of death threats against the Minister – Sun (H/T Frmgrl)

*   *   *   *

Sunday Update

Terrific column by (surprise) Warren Kinsella!!No one wins when a political fight turns dirty.

Ezra Levant’s is pretty decent too – Media in a lather! #TellVicEverything

This entry was posted in Canadian Government, Canadian Parliament, Canadian Politics, Crime, Too many Fools on the Hill, Victims rights?. Bookmark the permalink.

204 Responses to Mud fight over C-30 clouding real issues

  1. NB Tory Gal says:

    Very good post Joanne… happy to see it.

    • Joanne says:

      Thanks! I’ve seen you in some spirited debates on Twitter. This is an emotional issue on both sides, no doubt.

  2. old white guy says:

    warrants should always be necessary when conducting any criminal invstigation. aside from that , when did canadian politics cease being mean spirited???

  3. Liz J says:

    I can’t think of anything worse than child porn, I fail to see where anyone other than the perpetrators of such criminal behaviour should worry about their privacy.

    Knobs like Easter and Angus will jump on anything to blow off rhetoric against the Conservative government. Who wins? The sickos who use and abuse children in the name of privacy.

    • Andy says:

      My response to your “If you have nothing to hide … ” argument is simply, “I don’t need to justify my right to privacy. You need to justify violating it. Come back with a warrant.” The kiddie porn perverts arrested in recent weeks were caught by use of existing laws that don’t have the potential of abuse that bill C-30 has. And if that isn’t enough, consider this: Privacy is a basic tenet of living in a free society. Freedom and liberty is rarely lost in one fell swoop. They are usually eroded over time, little bits dissolving here and there, now and again until we finally begin to notice how much is gone and how little remains to combat the loss. When the government starts monitoring the phone numbers people call, many may shrug and say, “It’s just numbers, that’s all.” Then the government might start monitoring some phone calls and people say, “It’s just a few phone calls and I have nothing to hide.” The increase in phone monitoring inevitably leads to an elaborate network of further surveillance. Satellite surveillance might even be added to help track people’s movements. Then government might start analyzing people’s bank rec­ords. So you say”It’s just my deposits and some of the bills I pay—no problem since I have nothing to hide.” The government may then start combing through credit-card records and expand to Internet-service providers’ records, health records, employment records, and more. After a while, the government will be watching and knowing everything about us. Frankly, it’s none of their business and none of yours either. If you value your freedom and liberty so lightly, I suggest you move to Iraq or China where none exists. You might sing a different tune very quickly.

      • Joanne says:

        I’m swaying back and forth on this one but how exactly do we define ‘government’? If it’s the bureaucrats at every level as well as their political masters of the day, then I think I can understand your concern.

        The other problem with this bill is the unfair financial burden it may place on smaller internet providers – not what small businesses need right now.

      • Bec says:

        Not once do you address the issue of the perverts. It is not all about us and our freedoms. Our so called freedoms have been eroded collectively over many decades so to think otherwise is naive.
        If I run a red light, my picture is taken, if I speed through a playground zone, my licence plate is photographed, if I enter an elevator, I am on tape, if I phone my credit card provider, my call is monitored, if I enter a hospital, I am on tape every step of my journey……….It is simply a shut your eyes and it will go a way mentality to think that we are not already being monitored and long, long, long before this suggested bill.
        As I have said before, if you are willing to post on social network sites, you are NOT all that concerned about your privacy!

        • Joanne says:

          Good point Bec.

        • Andy says:

          Maybe you need to read my posting again and really read this time.

          You said: ‘Not once do you address the issue of the perverts…’

          I said: ‘The kiddie porn perverts arrested in recent weeks were caught by use of existing laws that don’t have the potential of abuse that bill C-30 has.’

          You said: ‘It is not all about us and our freedoms.’

          Well, actually, yes it is…

          You said: A bunch more stuff that kinda proves the rest of my posting by restating the obvious.

          You ended up saying: ‘As I have said before, if you are willing to post on social network sites, you are NOT all that concerned about your privacy!’

          Actually, you never said anything before about posting on social network sites that has anything to do with my posting. I will say that your privacy is compromised by what details you or respondents chooses to post on those sites. If I don’t want something echoed around the world, I just don’t post it on any website. In any case the key difference is that I will choose what to reveal, not you and your pet police state.

          • Joanne says:

            I said: ‘The kiddie porn perverts arrested in recent weeks were caught by use of existing laws that don’t have the potential of abuse that bill C-30 has.’

            60 out of 9,000 were arrested using the current laws.

            What about the others who are still out there?

  4. james isherwood says:

    I would like to point out the editoial by Adrian Humphreys in to National Post.
    It may give you more detail on C-30 powers.

  5. Calgary Junkie says:

    This was obviously a tough Bill to craft. Toews et al didn’t get it quite “right” the first time around, and so now they are going to tweak it.

    Eventually, a revised Bill will pass, having gone through a slightly different route than the anti-Harper universe is used to–they seem to have amnesia, when it comes to remembering typical process issues in a majority government.

    Anyway, as far as I’m concerned, this is mostly just noise, comparable to the dire warnings surrounding the voluntary long-form census. Our opponents seem to be buoyed up by this new “weapon” of theirs–the twitterverse. Good for them.

    But these letfy “twits” are pretty useless to any political party. Sure they like to have fun tweeting, hacking, being sarcastic, etc. But good luck trying to get them to the ballot box, never mind donating any money to their “cause”. They are kind of like Quebecers–waaaaaay more trouble than they are worth (to a political party).

  6. Fay says:

    Wow , great post Joanne!

  7. I don’t worry about my privacy.I just sponsored my Chinese wife,and there’s nothing,and I mean nothing that the govt. doesn’t know about me,and I couldn’t care less.I was treated well by immigration.

  8. paulsstuff says:

    In an ironic way Vikileaks and Anonymous have actually given the proposed bill credibility. Both hide behind what they think is a safe curtain, unable to be found or held account of statements made or actions taken. Much like the pedophiles the legislation is supposed to target.

    • Joanne says:

      Very true. And besides that they’ve given Vic Toews a certain amount of public sympathy that he might otherwise not had.

      The information has been public knowledge for some time but some folks like to stir the pot at times like this. I can think of someone in the Martin cabinet that was known to have some questionable associations in the past. Should we start talking about that right now? I don’t like the direction this is going.

  9. Richco says:

    This is a sideshow brought on by new & social media. It’s not going to stop any time soon, but how governments react to it may have to. If it means investigation to find the source of the leak of personal information by someone within a political party then so be it.

    I have to mention though that there are many on the right of the spectrum who don’t like this Bill either, so it’s not just the left ramping up their displeasure with it.

    In hindsight it wasn’t very smart of Vic Toews via his initial remark that sparked the opposition going ballistic, to give them fodder for their fire. That said, the private lives of politicians should be off limits. Warren K. did a very lengthy bit on this last week.

  10. paulsstuff says:

    Toews with “us or against us comment” was incredibly stupid. Some politicians are good with the one-liner barbs, Toews isn’t one of them.

    • wilson says:

      Perhaps, but when our courts find ‘artistic merit’ in pornography and the freaks get off scott free, there really is a fence that one must jump off and take a side.

  11. Ontario Girl says:

    Snoop and spy is already here, thanks to the LIBERALS Mr. Easter.
    No matter what, the media(Don Martin and Oliver especially) don’t have to act so joyous over the whole event.

    http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Snoop%2Balready%2Bhere%2Bthanks%2BLiberals/6173295/story.html

  12. jon says:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/twitter-site-attacking-vic-toews-shut-down-as-tories-accuse-ndp-of-dirty-sleazy-tactics/article2342111/

    Check out the comments section in the G&M’s Ottawa Notebook… a real theme developing. I’ve stopped counting at 40 CONSECUTIVE bashing the CPoC and Toews in particular… what are the odds of not having one — even one — person break that streak?

    A lot of attacks against Christianity too, which is kinda interesting. So that means I can attack Islam itself whenever a story pertaining to Muslims is posted where the faith itself is not part of the story. Oh wait, I’d be violating their terms of agreement, wouldn’t I?

    BTW, thanks Joanne for the previous thread. Much appreciated.

    • Joanne says:

      BTW, thanks Joanne for the previous thread. Much appreciated.

      My pleasure. And it demonstrates how readers and their comments add so much to this blog.

  13. Fay says:

    Lets stop deluding ourselves the opposition and media were going to react over the top no matter Vic Toews said.

    • wilson says:

      The Opps and the media are going to react over the top no matter what! period.
      Just like the ‘not’ when Minister Oda rejected funding of a Liberal pet project.
      They took that clerical notation to ‘contempt of Parliament’ charges.

      The LPC don’t have to act in a responsible way, they are the 3rd party.
      The NDPQ must take on little Trudeau’s attitude toward ‘Harper’s Canada’ or lose seats in Quebec.

      I’m with paulstuff,
      this vicious twitter attack on Minister Toews illustrates how these cowards hide behind a curtain and destroy lives, be it Ministers of the Crown, your next door neighbours teenager or with child pornography.

      Progressives are bullys.

      • frmgrl says:

        Progressives are bullys.

        And they are the ones who call conservatives bullies. Even some in the media, remember Terry Mildew during the election campaign and how he attacked PMSH? Hypocrites, all of them!

      • Liz J says:

        The entire opposition in the HOC have the media behind them no matter how sleazy and low they want to go. The MSM have hit bottom, they just have no credibility left. No matter how hard they try to put on a face of non-partisanship in reporting governmental affairs they ooze hatred for the government of Stephen Harper.

        Are we going to hear anything more on Justin Trudeau’s vacuous rant? Will the media go after Rae to discipline him? We all know the answer.

      • Jen says:

        Remember the taping between Raitt and her assistance and for some reason the tape was forgotten in a bathroom? well, the media got hold of it and aired it without the permission of the rightful owner. Not only did they aired it they discussed it analyzed it.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Amen to that! The real issue, kids abused in real time online.

    • Joanne says:

      I’m not crazy about allowing comments by ‘anonymous’. Would prefer that you choose a handle and stick to it. Having said that I agree with you 100%.

  15. What Liz J just stated is what I’ve been saying all along.The child molesters,abusers must feel a lot safer now,but the children aren’t.Vic Toews might have said it in the wrong way for some people,but not for me.I knew what he meant.He must have been felling very frustrated,knowing that the NDPPQ votes against the govt. on everything,and he knew it wouldn’t be any different.Same sex marriage,abortion on demand,no capital punishment even if a person tortured and killed dozens of people(they even keep the murderers protected from other prisoners),etc.Approx.3-4 years ago,a 20 year and an 18 year old men were at a small ferry landing here in New Brunswick,and they beat an elderly man (war veteran)so badly they almost killed him.This veteran would go there and clean up around the ferry landing.He never got paid for it,as he did it just for something to do.He would go there almost everyday to do this and talk to the people.He was well known and liked by all.The 20 year old did most of the beating onto the elderly man.He didn’t provoke them in any way.He was a man in very good conditioner for his age and was very active.He was beaten so bad that he hardly knows anyone,and when someone comes into the room he is very startled.They broke his cheeks,ribs,jaws,etc.They each got a short sentence in jail.The 20 year old one took a trade in jail(culinary) and had a job when he did his short sentence.You could say that the elderly vet died that day.I know that this is not really what is being discussed here,but I always wanted to tell this sad true story.

  16. Mary T says:

    Mahar has a story today that a few months ago he was presented documents from Toew’s wife’s divorce affidavit , from files in Winnipeg.
    That is the person I want to know, who stole files from a Winnipeg law office, or from the Court.
    Who else did that person shop those files around to. What other info has this person stolen.
    Those people telling Vic they are going to bed, eating supper or whatever are very childish. Do they know that stuff is out there forever and could come back to haunt them.
    Would there have been the same outrage if Vic had said, – we do not want anyone to assume if you are against this law, you could be deemed to not care what is happening to children by pedophiles and we know that is not true. This is a world wide problem, and the proof is the recent arrest of many people involved in this horrible practice.
    Oh, Don Martin, yesterday, was showing pages of stuff he said were copies of those affidavits he has been sent, but did not publish, and will not name sender.
    Who else, other than the Court, and law office has copies of those documents.
    Remember, hell hath no fury-

    • wilson says:

      Mahar says the court records are public.
      So anyone can access them and smear someone ANONYMOUSLY thru twitter or via journalist protection of the source, as Mahar did.

      So anyone entering public life, puts their lives and the lives of their entire family at the mercy of protected/untraceable anonymous attackers.

      • Jen says:

        So anyone entering public life, puts their lives and the lives of their entire family at the mercy of protected/untraceable anonymous attackers.

        Just as long the politicians are Conservatives Wilson.

        Yet, it is the police they worry about; well the media are worse.

  17. Martin says:

    To the “Toews had it coming” consensus in the media may now be added the name of Greg Weston. Yesterday he managed to link the names of Linda Keen, Richard Colvin,
    and amazingly, Helena Guergis, as examples of people whose reputations the conservative government had trashed. This was on the CBC P&P panel. My memory was that the original trashing of Guergis was lead by the opposition and the press, but maybe my memory is faulty. Craig Oliver compared the Twitter attacks to CPC attacks on Michael Ignatieff.

    • wilson says:

      Ah yes, the Libluvin media’s bias. Stories that didn’t get the results they wanted.

      Liberals got turfed. Libs and their media just can’t/won’t accept it.

    • jon says:

      I wouldn’t put stock in anything Weston has to say, I know I never do. He comes from a place of no credibility so I really can’t take him seriously — ever. He used to sound just like Levant and Lilley on issues pertaining to the CBC, it’s abuse of taxpayers’ dollars and its culture of secrecy. In fact, I use to look forward to his column in the Sunday Sun way back when, attacking the CBC every other week it seemed… certainly once a month. Now he’s silent. He’s been bought off. So I really can’t take him seriously. Whenever he opens his mouth, my brain is preprogrammed to ignore him, turning his comments into a garbled, encrypted language I can’t understand. It’s white noise for the most part.

      Here’s the little voice in my head that kicks into action once Weston begins to put his two cents in….

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGghswQgAzE

      • Joanne says:

        Hilarious video! And I hear ya about Greg Weston.

        Funny but my husband and I were just talking about that yesterday while tuning in on that poor excuse for a panel Power & Politics has on Fridays.

        The panels during the week can be quite entertaining – especially if John Ivison and/or Tom Flanagan are on.

        But Friday nights are the incestuous CBC pundits only. And Greg Weston sure has drunk the koolaid. He has been totally assimilated.

    • Martin I also seen that on P&P.Them 4,host included are so bias towards the PM and the CPC that they overjoyed when they talk obout it.Their job in the next 3 years is to try their best to bring down the CPC.I get so upset when I hear that so called media saying the CPC attacked Iggy.Everything they said about him was true,and were not fabricated like the lib media does against the CPC.The CPC has several potential leaders,such as Jason Kenney,John Baird,etc.,and the libs and NDPPQ have none.We have the most lib media in the world.

      • Jen says:

        These people in the media are making it a point to destroy the lives of each and every one of the conservative politicians. They are far far worst than the police. Police don’t ruin your life the media does. But one day when this government is brought down which the media is trying to do, canada will fall.
        The media themselves will be used against themselves. Radical groups who have no use for canada know exactly witch part/ies to infest and control and that aint the Conservatives. And they know which medias to control.
        Lib Scott Reid said the worst of the worst about the PM and he is the host of a show on CTV.

        Chretien pepper sprayed and put his hand on a person throat and that wasn’t repeated on television.
        The media are going to get what they deserve.

        • Tasha khierridien(probably spelled wrong)is also one of the hosts on the program National Affairs, and I used to like her when she was a guest on P&P,but now that she has her own program,she’s almost as bad and sometimes worse than Scott Reid.Reid at times appears to be not as bias as Tasha.

  18. cantuc says:

    I hope Mr Toews gets over himself about the long gun registry being finally ( almost) killed . I mean geezez , a monkey could have passed that bill in that government . Toews was hande a golden opportunity to look lke a superstar on that bill by the PM . Instead he does a 180 and comes off like a 2-bit imitation of a character from out of a b grade gangster movie .
    Theres some good things in the bill as well as a few not so good . In fact it may give us more protection than we have now . Theres a couple of parts though , that say a gov’t appointed person may do these thiings . Oooook , who ? And what exactly? .Stop talking to Cnadians like we’re from a Paraguayan jungle village , Mr. Toews . We won’t put up with it . Step out of the bananna bushes and grow up .

    • Joanne says:

      I have heard rumours that the bureaucrats in Toews’ ministry have been really pushing for this bill. If that is true then I think it’s fair to ask why and how altruistic are their motives?

    • Sandy says:

      Cantuc — Yikes! That sarcasm was really unnecessary.

      The fact that Toews is Mennonite and born in Paraguay has nothing to do with anything. I have close friends who were born there and are every bit Canadian as those of us born here.

      Tacky to say the least and not at all like you that is for sure. If I didn’t know better, I would suspect that an opposition hack has hijacked your handle.

      Anway, if political discussion has come to this, even among conservatives, I am very close to giving up blogging altogether.

      Because, I simply don’t need this kind of verbal diarrhea in my head.

      • cantuc says:

        Nobody hacked me Sandy but when somebody calls you a criminal , in fact the worse kind of criminal because you dare disagree or question him , sarcasm doesn’t come close to equaling that insult . It was nothing more than an arrogant attempt to stifle any debate . We are still a democracy here .I never mentioned him being a mennonite . Half my family is mennonite . My btrother-in-laws name is Menno . My brother-in-law would never try and tell somebody he anything he did or said was above questioning or debating . Arrogance is one reason why we have a conservative government . Liberal arrogance . The last thing I want to see is another damned lineral government because some body starts thinking he is above disagreement or questioning . South American dictators might get away with that but it isn’t going to do anything here but turn people against the government .

        • cantuc says:

          To add to that I don’t think it was right what that happened with that twitter account revealing Toews personal life . I never read any of it and I can’t think of anything much lower . Another thing , they just charged 70 or so people in Ontario with child pornography . There were 700 or more they didn’t chaarge . If they can’t keep up with the numbers now why make more laws ? What is wrong with just explaining the damned bill instead of the high and mighty “Don’t you dare question me ” crap .

  19. Gabby in QC says:

    I posted this over at The Iceman’s blog earlier …
    • I cannot understand the mistrust even some conservatives have expressed against the bill. Some of them sound as distrustful of government and law enforcement as the 9/11 truthers.

    • Minister Toews’s over-the-top rhetoric was uncalled for. Replying to a question from Liberal critic Francis Scarpaleggia, Toews said: “He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”
    But his opponents have been no less over-the-top. They talk of warrantless access, police state, Stasi-like, Stalinesque, Orwellian tactics … and those are the “gentler” criticisms.
    Something else I don’t understand … his opponents don’t trust him (and by extension the government) nor law enforcement, so why would they trust any judge’s decision to grant a warrant?

    • Setting up the minister for ridicule with the two infamous twitter accounts is the lowest form of political opposition.
    But Minister Baird should not have lowered himself to the same level by accusing the NDP of being behind one of those accounts merely on the basis of one speculative media report.

    All in all, not a particularly stellar performance on all sides of the political spectrum. Sad, really.
    ————-
    I’m finding it difficult to maintain a healthy interest in political issues when critics descend to such low tactics. I’ve been tempted to say a pox on all their houses.

    • Joanne says:

      Good to hear from you Gabby. Nobody comes out of this one unscathed.

      To be perfectly honest I have to admit that I’m frustrated and concerned when I hear legislation being challenged by the courts after it’s been set in motion. Why not get all this checked out ahead of time and correct any problems, etc.?

      But my main concern is that the major players seem to be posturing for their own political gain rather than trying to work together.

  20. Adam says:

    It’s rather unfortunate that most CPC’ers seem to lack a basic understanding of the C-30 bill and what things like IP addresses actually allow a person to do.

    What you may not be realizing, while blindly backing your favored horse is that it will actually come back to hurt you. It doesn’t have to be a partisan / left vs right discussion because it shouldn’t be. It’s bad for everyone regardless of politics. It will cost significant dollar signs and will not solve anything and is opposed by people that are smarter than anyone in any party on parliament hill.

    Then again, that seems to be the case with almost every bill the CPC has been pushing lately…

    • Joanne says:

      Well if there are problems with the legislation I think that needs to be addressed.

      And I don’t accept your comment that most CPC’ers are “blindly backing” our favored horse. I am surprised by the number of conservative supporters who are really against this bill as it stands now and that includes a number of CPC backbenchers, as well as people like Brian Lilley and Stephen Taylor.

      So I don’t think you’re being fair in your generalization.

      • Richco says:

        some CPC’ers are backing this bill but some are not. Wow – big tent, differing opinions under one roof – the sky is falling! That’s government for you.

        All that might prove is that there are CPC’ers who too want more clarity and further explanation of those parts of the bill that are fuzzy. That happens.

        We keep forgetting who is in charge and how really well Harper hears things and plans for every contingency.

        On the issue of whoever posted Toew’s divorce specs. Robert Fulford has a good column in the National Post today entitled “There’s no privacy online. And it isn’t missed” (don’t have a link – I’m looking at the hardcopy).

        Fulford brings us back to the reality of “online privacy” and how easy it is for anyone participating in social media to be hurt big-time by simply participating in discussion. He also writes about how social networking and internet spying brought down companies.

        He ends his piece with “Privacy is an ancient and once cherished right that has been transformed from a fact of like to a dying memory. And, as Facebook demonstrates several million times a day, a large part of humanity likes it the new way. Clearly, many users of social media thnk that the more everybody’s privacy is violated, the better. Call them extroverts, call them narcissists, an if you like call them flashers. Nevertheless, they have inherited the Earth, or at least a good part of the Internet.

        The truth is that if hackers can’t get into your computer yet it’s because they haven’t found out how to do it but will soon. The alternative possibility is that they do not consider you worthy of their attention.”

        There is no privacy on social media plain and simple. Everyone can be identified and found. Given what I read that some people post on facebooks and blogs many don’t understand that it’s front page news to somebody.

  21. Mary T says:

    Both Mahar and Martin have said they had copies of this stuff a long time ago but refused to publish it. No one has done a timeline on when Vic made that stmt and when the twitter stuff started. Did that person get those documents after said stmt.
    I doubt it, so they had been sitting on it for a long time, maybe even tried to get it out during the election.
    I doubt that Vic’s stmt caused it all to blow up, they were waiting for their chance.
    Do all politicians who have recently been divorced now have to worry their affidavits will come out and go viral. Should Pat Martin be shaking in his boots in fear.
    The person responsible for this must be outed and punished.

    • wilson says:

      The smear job deeply hurt Toews exwife, current wife and child/children.
      Someone needs to be fired for extreamly poor judgement.

      • Joanne says:

        Yes that was the worst part. It’s really low to go after the family.

        • Fay says:

          Yet Liberal MP Wayne Easter believes families are fair game and the Toews family deserves this.
          And no surprise when the Media reports that they agree.
          Disgusting!

  22. frmgrl says:

    I’m glad this legislation has gone to committee to be re-written. All parties have a chance together to hopefully write a bill that strikes the right balance between going after the child predators and personal privacy.

    Personal lives of politicians of all stripes is out of bounds. With the opposition and most in the media, there is such a hate on for the CPC, they can’t win for losing. No matter what the CPC do or say, they will feign faux outrage.

    All I can say it was not a good week for Canadian politics. Everyone has come out looking bad in this one.

  23. Ardvark says:

    Good post. I understand the motives behind such a law, I would hope everyone did, but I am not convinced that this may not at some time in the future be abused.

    • wilson says:

      True, but look at the abuse of anonymity re: smearing Toews family.

      • Ardvark says:

        Reprehensible IMHO as his family are not public figures and they got dragged into this mess for political purposes; however the court documents are public record and the act of tweeting them is not illegal in itself.

  24. Natasha says:

    Although I’ve been away and missed the whole Toews uproar, I do have concerns about some things I read here. For example…

    From Liz J: “I can’t think of anything worse than child porn, I fail to see where anyone other than the perpetrators of such criminal behaviour should worry about their privacy.”

    Child porn is reprehensible, but I happen to be totally opposed to Bill C30. I do worry about my privacy. I guess in Liz J’s world that automatically makes me a child pornographer or some equally evil criminal deserving of being locked up immediately (without due process perhaps?).

    Well, come and get me then — for the “crime” of caring about any further invasion of my privacy. While he discusses a different issue, George Jonas has it right; there are many out there who love more government interference and are not bothered by the decrease in liberty: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/18/george-jonas-our-one-night-stand-with-freedom/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter. I’m not one.

    I’m with Sun News on this: http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2012/02/20120218-083632.html — we don’t need Bill C30. And contrary to what Toews or the rest of you say, that doesn’t automatically mean I’m “with the child pornographers.”

    • Joanne says:

      When you say we don’t need C30, I can only ask you to read Paul Gillespie’s column which I linked to in the main post.

      “…I am concerned that when we focus on these individual issues we are missing the bigger picture.

      About 15 years ago, Canadian police conducting criminal investigations involving legally authorized wiretaps observed that emerging technologies were being used by criminals to frustrate their ability to intercept all communications. Seeking a solution, the police informed government and ISPs. Endless meetings, round tables, forums and panels were held, resulting in incredible volumes of reports, opposing views, endless suggestions and finally proposed lawful access legislation – first introduced by the Liberal government and reintroduced many times since then.

      At about the same time, an American police investigation revealed that 2,300 men in Canada had purchased access to child porn on the Internet, and 241 of them had Toronto-area IP addresses. Each address required a search warrant to identify basic subscriber information. Some ISPs had voluntarily kept records, and a name and address was revealed, but for those who did not, the investigation stopped. This is still an issue today…”

      Do you think he’s making this stuff up?

      • Joanne says:

        And from Lorna Dueck (also linked in main post):

        “Twenty-two Ontario children were rescued from child pornography this month, and we should stand with them. The police bust was possible only because warrants were built from Internet protocol addresses selected from 60 of 9,000 computers in Southern Ontario that had received and sent child porn in the previous 60 days.

        Obtaining warrants on all addresses simply wasn’t practical. “It’s still like putting a cup under Niagara Falls, that’s all we’re catching,” said Inspector Scott Naylor, manager of the Ontario Provincial Police’s child sexual exploitation section. More than 200 charges were laid against 60 people…”

  25. fh says:

    the bill is going to committee nuff said
    does that give MSM the right to giggle about the twitter accounts about Vic Toews
    ndp Jack Harris stated on power and politics that the person behind the disgusting Twitter account was acting legally it maybe legal but it is disgusting and sleazy
    would you trust the party that stands beside these sleaze bags
    the party behind this has earned the title the NO DECENCY PARTY
    It sounds like the activity can be traced and we can know who is the guilty one
    Without this knowledge the whole opposition is tainted as the NO DECENCY PARTIES
    I hope we can get past this horrible mess caused by someone without one once
    of decency
    fh

  26. jad says:

    Does anyone else see a resemblance between the cartoon character that fronts Anonymous and Justin Trudeau.

    http://blogs.canada.com/2012/02/17/hacker-group-anonymous-posts-video-demanding-vic-toews-resign-and-scrap-bill-c-30/

  27. fh says:

    As a proud Canadian I would hope this needed bill will get the changes to protect the privacy of all Canadians
    the investigation usually leads the police to the suspects and only then should information be requested and a warrant is still best but the giving of warrants needs to be assessed so that they can be exercised expeditiously
    the important bill needs adult conversation and facts FACTS I would hope Sun Media might publish the bill on line.
    I agree only the police should be able to request information to prevent black mail
    fh

  28. Relayer says:

    The Bill was never ABOUT kiddie porn, they slapped that fig-leaf on C-30 at the last second, so right off the top, our gov’t was lying to us. If they want to go after kiddie porners, let them dedicate serious funding for the purpose with existing police dep’ts who already fight this. Let them introduce LIFE sentences for child pornographers and kiddie diddlers. And let them get warrants to do so.
    Anything else is the thin edge of the police boot under your door.
    Either they withdraw this Bill or I’m done with the Conservatives.

  29. jt says:

    The oppos are having fun at the Con’s expense. Because they do have skin in this game. None of the Party’s involved have stated publicly that they will rescind the law, if passed. They want it for their own use, when and if elected.

    All that seems to be discussed in the legislation is that ISP’s will be required to install all the necessary equipment to do the bidding of CSIS, RCMP and even the Competition Bureau, as well as the Industry Minister’s office. Nothing is mentioned of “children”, “porn”, “molesters” anywhere in this bill. So, why change the name? Is it to make the medicine go down better?

    The ISP’s from what I gather will also be paid to install and for the information that they turn over to government agents. So, you should not see an increase in your contract price (wink).

    More than likely the same bunch who crafted the LGR registry laws (of which warrant-less searches of your property were not rescinded) are behind this franken law and just made the Minister look bad politically.

    Read it all here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=5380965&File=65

  30. Rich says:

    People can we all take a deep breath and rationally look at bill C30:
    1What is the main idea for the bill? Fighting Internet child pornograpy and peadophilia.
    2. Does the bill have some flaws? Yes, that is why the Prime Minister kicked the bill back to the committee before second reading for revision and amendments to alleviate those concerns for privacy.
    3. The Liberal Party of Canada tried to bring in the same bill with more drastic consequences in the 1990′s; why because the Libs also realized that Child porn and peadophlia where major problems.

    Let’s stop listening to Opposition rhetoric and media hype and pay attention to facts. Bills can be amended and improved for the betterment of the Canadian public with all Parliamentarians providing honest input. The gameship for the concensus media has to stop.

  31. Clown Party of Canada says:

    Why not have a “Bill – C30(A)” in which it states that it is only for child pornography and national security – such as finding those who wanted to attack Parliament and behead Harper. These are the only two things that the bill should cover; anything else is an invasion of privacy and should require a warrant.

    One of the problems is that some sites, like this one, Small Dead Animals, and many others that I regularly visit, let us know links to “questionable” sites (in the eyes of some) to check out the facts for ourselves. It is all the other “government agencies” such as the HRC which could check on your/my internet traffic and try to make a case.

    Paulsstuff says: February 18, 2012 at 9:49 … “Toews with “us or against us comment” was incredibly stupid,” which is so true. Prime Minister Kim Campbell [Kim Campbell officially became Canada's 19th prime minister on June 25, 1993.] said exactly the same thing – and the conservatives wondered why I did not vote for her – I was actually forced to vote LIEberal because there was no alternative at the time. When the long gun registry was presented, the same statement was used, and innocent people had become criminals. As soon as a politician states that “with us or against us comment” statement, they lost a lot of credibility.

    • Joanne says:

      Why not have a “Bill – C30(A)” in which it states that it is only for child pornography and national security – such as finding those who wanted to attack Parliament and behead Harper. These are the only two things that the bill should cover; anything else is an invasion of privacy and should require a warrant.

      Yes that would seem to be a very reasonable compromise.

  32. jt says:

    So, all this kerfuffle brought out into the open the fact that Canadians were reminded of all the “privacy” that they don’t have at the hands of various government departments and officials, at every level.

    What I’m taking away is that Canadians do not trust their government and their employees in the least. Anger is fear and Canadians now appear to have more reason to fear their governments, rather than trust them to serve their interests. It cuts across all political boundaries, despite what Vic was trying to pass off as something to protect the children.

    Well, it might, but what it appears to do in it’s present form is a lot of other stuff.

    • Richco says:

      I’m surprised that no one has linked to the front page lead story on the National Post today that lists all of those areas in your life where governments (at all levels) can access your private information and most Canadians aren’t aware of it. It’s called “They’re Watching – What does government already know about us? The list includes medical, financial, travel, scholastic, policing, immigration, transportation and corporate information.

      It’s really an eye-opener and likely things we already knew but forget about when sidelined.

  33. Joe says:

    To be honest I am truly conflicted on this legislation. I fear that Vic is acting as the front man for a bunch of nameless faceless bureaucrats who are seeking to enslave free people.

    On the other hand years ago I was shown some ‘kiddie porn’ and I can not begin to describe the repulsive, hideous things that grown adults were doing to and with children. I would hope that the police were able to trace the filth back to the perpetrator and remove that individual from society permanently! I know that I never want to see anything like that again.

    However I am not sure how the ISP – police request presently works. I know of one person who received a knock on the door at 1 AM from the local constabulary. It seems turned out that the daughter in the home was contemplating suicide and expressed her thoughts to a ‘friend’ in a chat room. The friend phoned the police who got in touch with the ISP and got the street address of the girl. The parents sent a thank you note to the ISP for co-operating with the police in this manner.

    • Joanne says:

      Yes it certainly is a difficult situation with competing interests. Interesting about you being shown the ‘kiddie porn’. I’m sure it would be very disturbing. What were the circumstances or is that too personal a question? Perhaps you were a policeman or something? Feel free to tell me to mind my own business.

      • Joanne says:

        I fear that Vic is acting as the front man for a bunch of nameless faceless bureaucrats who are seeking to enslave free people.

        Meant to address that too. It seems that Toews wasn’t up on all the aspects of the bill which is a bit worrisome. Check out Coyne’s tweet on that.

        More here.

        • Richco says:

          Oh, you just reminded me of Coyne’s excellent column in the NP today too, but it’s not about this issue, it’s about Baby Trudeau and it is indeed mint!

      • Joe says:

        Way back when I was a young man I went to a friend’s stag party. The host of the party brought out some old porn films he had and began to show them. One of the first reels was kiddie porn. It took me a minute or two to realize what it was I was watching whereupon I walked out. About 30 seconds later I was joined by everyone else in the viewing room. We waited for a bit to calm down then took the reel and burned it. I don’t know if it was illegal back then to possess kiddie porn or not but we weren’t about to let it stay in circulation.

        • Joanne says:

          Wow! Good for you guys for handling it like that. That whole situation would be so revolting. The host was a obviously a slimebucket.

          (And of course these days the “reels” are now computer files that are so easy to hide and to distribute.)

  34. Mary T says:

    And how about this:FBI Seeks Developer for App to Track Threats on Social Media

    Updated: Friday, 17 Feb 2012, 10:33 AM EST

    Read more: http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/fbi-seeks-developer-for-app-to-track-threats-on-social-media-ncxdc-021712#ixzz1mlneuOmq

  35. C says:

    Folks, this is no partisan issue.

    This bill would have been every, single bit as odious had it been introduced by the Liberals (as at least some of it was previously), the NDP, the Conservatives, the Bloc, the Greens, or any private member. Just because other parties (or nations) have passed intrusive, invasive legislation doesn’t mean it’s a good idea for the current government to follow suit. The fact that serious problems exist in Canada does not mean that every proposed legislative solution to that problem is appropriate.

    Please take a moment to read some of the excellent analysis out there. There are at least three large issues with this bill, even besides the warrantless access part (which does seem mainly to codify the existing practice):

    the technical requirements mean that, if the bill is passed, we will be legislating security vulnerabilities into ISP’s networks by design! These access points–which do not currently exist–are potential avenues for hackers, phishers, criminals, foreign powers, disgruntled ISP/telecom employees to access the data of any Canadian.
    the minister responsible may allow anyone to inspect ISP networks/equipment and data.
    in addition to the more general lack of judicial oversight,
    you may never find out if you’ve been the target of surveillance

    These are not even all of the problems that have been identified. But the real issues for me are:

    does this legislation open up new possibilities for abuse? Yes.
    am I comfortable endowing every future Public Safety minister with these powers? No.

    I trust police officers generally, but not absolutely. It may be that we need to make it possible for police to access warrants more quickly, but we should not consider expanding the range of information they have warrantless access to.

  36. Pingback: Vikileaks & premature reaction to C-30 show nasty side of politics | CRUX OF THE MATTER

  37. Gabby in QC says:

    Now that I’ve had time to read all the links you provided, Joanne, let me say what a well-documented post you’ve written.

    I still have a difficult time accepting the criticism from conservatives on this bill. I take it as “normal” that those on the left disagree with anything the Conservative government proposes. But for conservatives to disagree so vehemently? They supposedly support law & order and tough-on-crime legislation. That strong opposition to Bill C-30 just doesn’t correspond to the conservative profile, if I can use that expression.

    I found the analogy used by Lorna Dueck in the Globe article referenced by Joanne very close to my own thinking on the bill:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/its-child-porn-we-need-bill-c-30/article2341294/
    “Think of it like this: With this kind of cyber crime, surfing the Internet is akin to driving your car. The car is your private property and you know how to use it, but some people keep making the road dangerous. You appreciate the radar gun or spot checks at the side of the road, and you take down a licence-plate number when a driver needs to be reported. It’s a public service that keeps us safe. That’s how police see access to your IP address – it will help them to identify lawbreakers.”
    Does that mean that everyone having an internet account will be on the law enforcement radar? You would think so, given the negative comments of opponents of the bill. Although opponents of the bill scoff at it, the line that if you’ve done nothing wrong, like being involved in child pornography, you’ve got nothing to fear is a valid point, IMO.

    It is more than sad that thanks to the negative media and to negative blogs — and I include right-wing in both cases — the trust that the general public should have in its institutions has been seriously eroded. Not that it should be blind trust, but for a society to function properly, the population has to have some trust in its government, politicians, law enforcement authorities, the judiciary, etc. Remove that trust and what we could end up with is mob rule driven by FaceBook petitions or the Twitterverse.

    • Joanne says:

      Remove that trust and what we could end up with is mob rule driven by FaceBook petitions or the Twitterverse.

      That’s a very scary thought.

      I agree that the extreme rhetoric on both sides has been regrettable. The fact that this bill is being sent to committee so soon shows that the Gov’t realizes it has some serious issues that need to be aired. But if we could just do that in an adult fashion, wouldn’t that be great?

    • Gabby,you couldn’t have said it any better .I love your analogy.I had some conservatives(they say they are,but talk more like libs or NDP)on another site that asked me if I wanted the police to kick my door down,how bad it was in Nazi Germany,Russia,etc.They were completely off the subject all together.My main point to them was I’m 72 years of age,and I definitely have nothing to hide,so I’m not afraid of the police kicking down my door.They were just talking stupid,and they did sound just like the libs and NDP in Question Period and media scrums.I hope they read this,as they know who I’m talking about,as they will remember my name.

  38. maggie says:

    C – Thank you for the info on the proposed bill – there is very little clearly stated info out there.

    The other unspoken fear, for me, has to be the overall discrediting of all police forces in this country in recent years.

    Supposing someone is house sitting for us while we are away and they start logging onto these awful sites. Any request for the name of the owner of the email address would show up with our name and that would be the name on the warrant applied for.
    By the time we had managed to show that we had not accessed the info our names and reputation could well be in tatters and given my lack of faith in the police I do not trust their ability to keep this info secret, especially for folks who live in small towns etc.
    However well intentioned this law is we must remember how the road to hell is paved!

  39. Bubba Brown says:

    The “With us or with the Pedophiles” was a really bad way to phrase when you are asking for support.
    Minister Toews seems sincere, I think he could have been a little less dramatic and laid it out asking for input.
    People are very concerned with Government interference.
    The recent changes to our DUI laws going from 8% to 5% and giving a police officer the ability to be judge and jury was not a good idea.
    Some officers simply get carried away, like the ones who abused the 82 year old woman.
    The law change has been declared unconstitutional, I have heard.
    I ran into Constable Cranky, I do not drink and drive or condone anyone else doing this.
    He accused me of drinking.
    He did not ask if I had alcohol to drink today, he asked how much alcohol I had to drink.
    Then he wanted to look in my trunk, he was red faced, rude and obnoxious.
    He did not get away with it or get a look in my trunk.
    I am not the only one in this area to have problems with this cop he is a bully.
    Point is Minister Towes spell out exactly what you are proposing, we all want this problem dealt with.
    Ask for input, if the Opposition want to have input invite them to make a proposal.
    Ask them what exactly they plan on doing about this problem?
    You know “what would you do if you were PM”?
    Suzuki asked that question, I would have said “pull your tax free status , you little lobbiest”
    As for the twittering using the pathetic excuse that Iggy was “attacked” WHAT/
    With the truth?
    Slightly OT Tiny Trudeau, says “His Canada” is being changed?
    Then he whines about abortion and SS marriage.
    Obama talks about equality and the forces employers to fund abortions and birth control.
    It is always about sex with the progressive Lefty types isn’t it?
    Iggy wanted to export abortion.
    Mandsbridge brought up abortion in his one on one with PM Harper.
    This pile on of a Minister is wrong, disagree with his proposals, make some of your own.
    I hope the speaker nails the culprit.

  40. Sandy says:

    Something no one is talking about are the proxy’s whereby Internet users, commenters, whatever, hide behind a proxy IP number.

    A couple of years ago I wrote a post about a young girl who had been bullied. I got a death threat aimed at her. I did not approve the comment and called the police. They can within an hour and I watched them try to hunt down the IP.

    Turned out it was via a proxy service out of the Netherlands. So, he couldn’t check anything other than with that proxy company — which he planned to do once he got back to the office.

    So, does Bill C-30 deal with those proxies? If not, all the ranting is for nothing.

    And, yes, there are even companies who currently offer fake e-mail addresses which can be used once.

  41. frmgrl says:

    Hey guys, check out Sandy’s blog for some common sense.
    http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2012/02/18/vikileaks-premature-reaction-to-c-30-show-nasty-side-of-politics/

    As I stated on my comment above. I believe you will see a good bill come out of committee that will strike the right balance Seeing that a broad range of amendments will be accepted is a good start. The government is reaching out and seeking the opposition’s assistance. The opposition should play nice and work with them.

  42. Sandy says:

    For those who don’t know about proxies, check out this link — to surf anonymously.

    http://www.hide-my-ip.com/

    And, some who have left comments here don’t think law enforcement needs all the help they can get?

  43. frmgrl says:

    This is starting to really get out of hand. Apparently there have been death threats against Vic Toews.
    OTTAWA — The Mounties have been called to investigate death threats against Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, QMI Agency has learned.
    http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2012/02/20120218-152011.html

  44. Gabby in QC says:

    And now, if I may, some comments on the content of the links provided by Joanne.
    • “I am shutting down before any other innocent people are targeted” writes the originator of Vikileaks30.
    Sorry, but IMO, the person is closing it down because s/he’s scared s***less that s/he’s going to be tracked down.
    It’s too bad the Ottawa Citizen rushed to print what it had found out rather than using the connection with Vikileaks to draw more information about the person’s identity.

    • From the National Post op-ed What Vikileaks hath wrought:
    “In the House of Commons, he [Minister Toews] suggested Canadians “can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.” It is beyond satire.”
    IMO, if you’re going to criticize someone, using the person’s words to condemn him, have the decency to be scrupulously accurate. The Minister directed his retort, condemnable though it might be, to the Liberal critic, not to Canadians in general.
    From Hansard, Monday Feb 13:
    “Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.):  
        Mr. Speaker, the government is preparing to read Canadians’ emails and track their movements through cellphone signals, in both cases, without a warrant. …
    Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Public Safety, CPC):  
        Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the opportunity to tell him that every province unanimously supported moving forward with the legislation, legislation that was introduced first under the Liberal government, by his party. …
      He [Mr. Scarpaleggia] can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”
    The Toronto Sun editorialists are also guilty of the same inaccuracy. In its editorial, the TorSun puts it this way:
    “You’re either with the government, or with the child pornographers.”
    – Public Safety Minister Vic Toews

    • Furthermore, Ontario Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian is quoted as saying:
    “This is going to be like the Fort Knox of information that the hackers and the real bad guys will want to go after.” The question arises: did she have the same concerns about the long-gun registry? See, that line of thinking can work both ways.

    • Finally, I wish I were as optimistic as Paul Gillespie in the Ottawa Citizen article Do lawful access right, but get it done, where he says:
    “Canada is a great country because we can have reasoned and respectful debate around this very important issue.”
    There has been very little evidence of that “reasoned and respectful debate” this past week.

  45. Pingback: Attack on freedom and privacy: Canada’s Bill C-30 — mooseandsquirrel.ca

  46. Joe says:

    The more I read about this ‘event’ the more I believe that Vic was set up by a bunch of (un)civil servants that want him and all other Conservatives gone. Of course Vic didn’t do himself any favours by his bull in a china shop method of charging ahead without thoroughly familiarizing himself with what was in the bill. I would hope that Vic is able to regroup, get the bill corrected and fire the SOBs that gave him that pile of trash to begin with. I also hope that Vic has learned the lesson that he must never trust a civil servant again and that if he is trusting a civil servant he must keep his mouth shut.

  47. Joanne says:

    Memo to anyone who left a comment and hasn’t seen it published yet. If you have a habit of using multiple aliases, please [insert Pat Martin expletive here].

    • Jen says:

      There was a similar bill brought in by the liberals which contains far more intrusions into public privacy. Brian Lilley ssid so yesterday after Easter made his comments about Toews. A bit late don’t you think for Brian to bring the subject when he could have done so from day one.

      The conservatives have been under attack for years, and no matter how hard they tried they are not wanted period to run this story.
      It shocks me to hear foreign leader talk highly of the PM than I would hear from the canadian media.
      The msm know how to rup you apart more so than the police. In other words, I sooner trust the police than the media.

      Never forget that it was the ndp the libs and the bloc who all demand that the PM bring into Canada some of the Gitmo prisoners requested by Obama. When the PM said no the others went frantic, they railed on him and so did their media.
      Can you imagine demanding that terrorists be brought into canada without an iota to canadians safety and it is the police we worry about.

  48. fh says:

    maybe in filter
    fh

  49. fh says:

    sorry wrong bill c30 it was 2007
    still looking
    fh

  50. Richco says:

    So in reading the Matt Gurney piece it appears that Toews didn’t know the exact wording of that particular clause in his own bill? Gurney’s usually right on mark with his stuff.

  51. Liz J says:

    Toews didn’t get out a clear explanation of his bill but like all bills of this nature it needs to be debated/tweaked/ amended where necessary so as to target the element it’s meant to.

    What we really need to be concerned about are the threats to Toews and his family, this is extreme over-reaction of a nature not seen in this country.We need to know what’s really the driving force behind it. Is it being used to fuel on-going attacks on the Harper Conservative government, gotcha gone mad or something more sinister? Something has gotten way out of hand here.

  52. Richco says:

    a good column this morning, and it’s looking more and more that Vic Toews either didn’t read the bill before tabling it, or didn’t make sure the wording was the same everywhere it was posted formally.

    In the end this looks very bad for the opposition, and those who claim the CPC party is accepting of diverse opinion…..again.

    http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/17/media-in-a-lather-tellviceverything

  53. Richco says:

    We’ve been had once again by bad journalists and an opposition looking for anything that sticks to stick to Harper. In the process we learn the true devious nature of the opposition via twitter and nothing changes the fact that Harper is still in charge of a majority government.

    All I can say is, thankfully that’s the case.

    • Liz J says:

      Yeah, agreed Richco, all very true.

    • Joanne says:

      nothing changes the fact that Harper is still in charge of a majority government.

      Yes that is a relief and in fact everyone can now see that a Conservative majority gov’t does not need to make the opposition quiver in fear in spite of what Justin Trudeau says.

      The gov’t is obviously listening and prepared to make concessions where necessary. I only wish the minority McGuinty gov’t were as responsible and open to public input.

  54. Liz J says:

    Where this bill as it is currently understood could become problematic reaches right into our smaller towns and communities serviced by police forces who could have access to local people’s private affairs. There needs to be a barrier against such access without cause.

    • Joanne says:

      Good point.

      • Richco says:

        Joanne – just now when I went to post here I got a pop-up advertizement to something called “Sticky Keys”. It came up over top of the comment box.

        • Joanne says:

          Really? That’s troubling. Anyone else having that problem?

          • Richco says:

            trying this again – no ad this time.

            Kinsella’s column today is a good one too Joanne.

            Also, at WK’s website he’s posted his dislike for the Drummond report WHICH, if the PC Ontario war room team is paying attention is an opportunity waiting to happen.

            Kinsella also offers up Jon Wright’s latest poll on how the country is incrementally shifting to the right AND, an excerpt from his next book that is very complementary to Harper and how the Liberals would do well not to underestimate the CPC.

  55. Dave says:

    Starting to wonder if Toews got setup by some of the senior bureaucrats working on this file?

  56. Liz J says:

    We will be wondering and blaming until the culprit(s) are outed.

  57. Richco says:

    O/T this is an interesting article on the state of social media. It’s also a bit more of a glimpse as to how it’s being used and misused.

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1133796–aaas-conference-social-media-drives-less-protest-than-previously-believed-say-researchers

  58. Bec says:

    After reading the comments at the ‘Kinsella’ piece and even at some conservative sites I can’t help but think that these people are missing the point.
    The point that WK is making is that many ‘Conservative’ voters and pundits RESPECTIVELY argued against this bill. The opposite occurred from the left. Sneaky shenanigans and vicious vitriol ruled the day and exactly what does that accomplish? We’ve all watched that movie before and they are like the boy that cried wolf now, no one listens or cares.

    To have the basement dwelling commenter’s continue to load up their angry, snarky bombs just demonstrates to me that Kinsella has it right. It is obvious that they are incapable of standing back, taking a look, reading again and interpreting the message. Nothing justifies, absolutely nothing, a character assassination or exposure of a privately painful event. Iow, stick to the topic.

    As well, what the Levant article demonstrates is the sheer hypocrisy of the pick and choose media. It doesn’t get clearer than that how they silently snicker over this situation but were and are, entirely silent over other freedoms that have been trampled on.
    They are so predictable.

    • Richco says:

      I see Kinsella’s point that the opposition is in no position to demand or do anything at all at the moment to move the Harper gov’t.

      What did tip the point of this was that many rank & file conservatives and many in the conservative media camp force Harper’s hand. Not the opposition.

      Harper doesn’t have to do anything the opposition bitches about.

  59. Bubba Brown says:

    Good morning! Every Time I read down through the comments here I come away enlightened.
    Sometimes embarrassed, I believed the media phrasing of MP Toews comments.
    Silly me, I know better, thank you Gabby in QC for the Hansard.
    Mea Maxima Culpa
    Just another gotcha wafer-gate moment in Canada.
    If the oppos have a problem they should be working it out in the HP not using social media to smear and denigrate.
    Canadians need a strong opposition, not the national enquirer
    Interesting that the Liberal Bill was thought more invasive.
    We are how ever communicating and this endless gotcha will continue.
    The oppos have only tired, failed old guys like Bob Rae and the immature tiny Trudeau.
    The Quebec love affair with the NDPQ-F has all the staying power of a one night stand.
    The Media Party is up against Sun News and all the rest of us who are pleased to ignore them.
    I will not believe the Media until I can fact check , repeat 100 times.

    • jon says:

      “The Quebec love affair with the NDPQ-F has all the staying power of a one night stand.
      The Media Party is up against Sun News and all the rest of us who are pleased to ignore them.”

      And that’s the best part. The NDP has a high enough total number of seats that they won’t come crashing down to 20 or 30 and the Libs have so few that even if they did “well” it would only be relative to those 35 seats. In other words, a sort of equilibrium will result, with the Libs probably ending up with about 60 or 70, the NDP with 50 or so, virtually making a certainty of another CPoC victory in 2015.

      Now, having said that, anything of course can happen between now and the next election, but I just don’t see a Sponsorship Scandal-like collapse in the offing. And it’ll be another blow for the Media Party as well

      Imagine the pain for them to have to report Harper as having won 4 straight elections. And unlike with Chretien, he had the Media Party fighting him every step of the way, making his victories all the more impressive.

  60. Gabby in QC says:

    I’m not so sure that the conservative media hasn’t also been strident in its opposition to Bill C-30. Just one example: Lorne Gunter, whose opinions I usually agree with. In a column entitled Want to read my email, Vic Toews? Get a warrant Gunter wrote:
    “I was about to write a column defending the Tories’ “lawful access” bill, albeit with strong reservations. Then Public Safety Minister Vic Toews accused anyone and everyone who wasn’t fully behind his bill of being supportive of the sexual creeps who prey on children by making and distributing pornographic images of them.”

    That passage illustrates to me that Gunter’s was a highly emotional response to an equally emotional response by Minister Toews, when the latter said to an individual MP NOT to the entire Canadian population as it keeps on being portrayed in the media: “He [Lib MP Scarpaleggia] can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”

    I wish he had gone with his first instinct: “I was about to write a column defending the Tories’ “lawful access” bill, albeit with strong reservations.”

  61. Gabby in QC says:

    As to some commenters wondering whether Minister Toews was set up …
    • Much has been made about the change in the title of Bill C-30. I wonder if that change actually took place. If it’s easy to photoshop — or should that be fauxtoshop? — a picture, surely it’s just as easy to photoshop two documents side-by-side? I saw a picture of the two documents on a CBC website but I’ve been unable to find it again.

    • Also, the person/persons responsible for the Vikileaks30 site. I wonder whether that IP address originating from Parliament is used by members of the media. I can think of more than one media personality who might like to get that kind of information out.

    • Some media people are rationalizing the use of details about Vic Toews’s private life, saying it may go to character. They preface that by saying that in the past, the press gallery has refrained from publishing such information out of respect for politicians’ privacy.
    I guess they forgot the kind of “information” they dug up & published about Helena Guergis when she was still in cabinet and a member of the Conservative caucus.
    * Her previous relationships, going back about 10 years (?). I believe that was Jennifer Ditchburn doing that bit of “investigative reporting.”
    * Then there was Guergis’ generous mortgage & the virtual visit of her new house, which gave anyone clicking on that website a look at her house. Bob Fife was the “investigative reporter” on that one; he “reported” the amount of the mortgage to the general public and to the Ethics Commissioner, questioning how Guergis had obtained it.
    * And of course, the purported “busty hookers” & cocaine use “reported” by the Star’s Kevin Donovan.
    As soon as Guergis was no longer a member in good standing of the Conservative caucus, however, she became the media darling, portrayed as a victim of PM Harper. All of it was media manipulation for political gain, regardless of intrusions into an MP’s private life.

    There was also the case about two prominent members of the media — Norm Spector & Andrew Cohen, the latter a professor of journalism, no less — writing about the purported marital breakup of a very prominent Conservative couple.

    Dan Gardner is another one, who although he doesn’t necessarily write about details of politicians’ lives, usually personalizes whatever criticisms he has about the current government, working PM Harper into practically every column. At times I think he has a man-crush on Harper, but suppresses it by criticizing everything about him.

    Journalists usually justify their own intrusions into private lives by citing the bromide “sunshine is the best disinfectant.” If they truly believed that, they would let the sunshine in into some of their own sometimes rank ranks.

    • Liz J says:

      Good comment Gabby.

      Investigative reporting by the journalists whose handiwork we regularly see and read is increasingly trending into gossip territory.

  62. jt says:

    Gabby, you’re off the rails on this. The civil service is the “unofficial opposition”. The Prime Minister and leader of this Conservative government alluded to that fact, a long time ago. Cue the furor in the HOC when he did. Your take on criticism by conservatives is especially specious. It’s our job to be voiciferous in our criticisms and in this case with the political fallout from this particular, hot button legislation the CONS screwed up – big time! Political stupidity, by a minister of the crown who should be on the ball, but isn’t. He should resign, or if not fire half or all those skunks occupying positions in his ministry that wrote this legislation up.

    Vic, by his own admission didn’t read his bill in detail before it was released to Parliament. DUH! The same skunks who wrote the LGR laws are the same one’s writing this law. They are not particularly inclined to this government, or to the freedoms of a Parliamentary democracy and made Vic, plus this government look bad. Political sabotage by the unelected, unofficial opposition. That is the bottom line.

    Some of us conservative supporters are being more vocal due to the ineptitude of this minister, who’s heart seems to be in the right place on the kiddy-porn aspect of this bill, but I’ve read it. It’s crap ! An abomination, badly sold and nowhere in this bill is there mentioned anything regarding “children” or “porn”. I will not support the bill and the ramnifications behooves conservatives to loudly and forcefully voice their opposition to this bill. Over the top, if necessary – it’s that bad.

    This government needs to wake up. It seems to have grown cocky in the short time it’s been in power to the forces aligned against it, now it’s base is pissed too. Too bad, so sad, if you don’t feel comfortable with our criticisms.

    I am dealing with another privacy issue with the CRA right now, that has all the indications of a Minister not knowing what the back room boys in their department are doing behind their back. Usually a Minister will reply to correspondence in writing – there’s a record of that correspondence. When a member of the Minister’s office replies with a telephone call, I take it that there will be no record of the conversation and that the Minister did not receive it, or be aware of the taxpayer’s concerns. Political sabotage, or the Minister is aware and doesn’t care what the taxpayer’s concerns are.

    I’ll be going “over the top” with my MP on that, in writing. That MP is the PM. I will make my representations to him in no uncertain terms, because these issues strike right at the freedoms that we now don’t have, courtesy of our unelected. publicly paid civil servants (the unelected, unofficial opposition) who do have an agenda and are politically partisan to a particular social-political belief. It isn’t liberalism or the slightly pinko version espoused by the NDP.

    I don’t hear from the opposition benches any calls of “vote for us, we’ll rescind the bill”, like we did the CONS over the fun registry, do you? That’s because this legislation is written FOR them. The CONS might have gotten rid of the registry aspect of the LGR, but gun owners are effectively still registered – by the fact that they are required to maintain an FAC certificate to be compliant with the laws remaining, including the one where police do not require a warrant to kick your door in at 3 am, to search your property for weapons, based on your neighbor’s cries “I saw a gun”.

    Whose side are the CONs on? By the looks of this legislation, not mine. Bite it.

  63. Gabby in QC says:

    Jt, I may be off the rails, as you say, but you need to take care of your anger management issues. It’s thus pointless to address your comment. You’re entitled to your opinion and I to mine. Bite that.

  64. Joanne says:

    O.K. Everyone take a deep breath here… ;)

    • Sandy says:

      I agree, we need to take a deep breath. There have actually been comments on Cotm from conservatives that I haven’t been able to publish. The last I looked, we were a big tent party.

      Perhaps it is a generation gap, with me at the mature end of things. ;)

      Look, the Internet is the equivalent of the wild west and law and order is needed. A new type of social contract is not the of freedom as we know it. Yet, some libertarians are very emotional about this.

      One other thing Jo — I have noticed a whole bunch of new commenters all of a sudden. You?

      And, a thank you to Gabby, I appreciated all your clarifications.

      • Sandy says:

        correction …. the new social contract is not the “end” of freedom as we know it.

      • Gabby in QC says:

        Thank you, Sandy.

        In expressing my opinion on issues, I now try not to engage in person-to-person debates like I used to do, because I noticed those could lead to heated exchanges. I don’t think I’ve ever been excessively confrontational but I guess some people still take my comments personally, like someone did here today.

        In the past I was even accused of being too politically correct or trying to be a ‘net-nanny. So I tried to be more direct, without being offensive. My criticism is usually directed at people who are in the business of criticizing everything: the media. Way before I started blogging, I’ve felt that the media, generally speaking, is often inexact, manipulative, and at times even dangerous, especially in times of social unrest.

        Oh well, as Abraham Lincoln reputedly said: “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”.

        No more comments from me on this thread. That should please at least one commenter! :-D

  65. maz2 says:

    Of ******, the left-liberal Cookie Monster.

    Have you seen/heard the outrage from the libertarian/libertine left? Any twits twittering ’bout Google counting keystrokes, etc.? Is the media slinging mud at ******?

    …-

    “Privacy warning

    Online privacy advocates were highly critical of Google’s actions.

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote: “It’s time for Google to acknowledge that it can do a better job of respecting the privacy of web users.”

    Although much of the criticism has been directed at the search giant, the Wall Street Journal said that in addition to Google, a number of advertising companies had been using the work-around which had been known about for some time.

    An Apple spokesman said in a statement: “We are aware that some third parties are circumventing Safari’s privacy features and we are working to put a stop to it.””

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17076670

  66. Joanne says:

    I think both Gabby and Jt have made some good points, but Jt’s starting to stray into ‘personal attack’ territory which is against the rules. So I’ll just make use of the pending filter for a while.

  67. MaryT says:

    Who writes most of the bills. Does a minister just give his/her ideas and outlines and then trusts his people to write and prepare it. Would it not be possible for a troll or whatever, in said office, to hijack said bill and change wording in the deep bowels of said bill. This bill, and the minister not supposed to know the wording, will make every other minister suspect of all staff members.
    Remember Pelosi saying one had to pass obamacare in order to know what was in it. I wonder how many mps really read an entire bill before voting yes or no.
    I also watched the exchange between Vic and said ndpqer and he did not refer to all Canadians, just the questioner. The response by the media and tv honchos proves they don’t read Hansard or pay attention.
    A couple of journalists have said they had that info for weeks or months, so who else had it other than the person shopping it around. So, who would be able to get that info out asap via twitter rather than a column.

    • Sandy says:

      When I worked for the Harris gov’t, my boss did a private members bill on school bus safety — which actually made it into law by the way.

      He and I had to meet regularly with a bureaucrat who worked for the parliamentary library. He was a lawyer and he and his staff designed the legislation.

      Once the wording was as my boss wanted it, and approved as appropriately stated, it sent the Transportation Minister, under whose pervue it was.

      So, likely it is similar in Toews’ case. He would only have seen the actual legislation just before it was tabled. A more junior public servant staff member in the department involved would have put it online.

      That said, Toews’ Senior Political Staffer would also have seen the draft legislation as well.

      Another thing is that first reading of any legislation is always a preliminary draft. It goes through many such drafts until Royal Assent.

      In any event, there are going to be some heads rolling tomorrow if someone screwed up in either office, the office where the legislation was designed and written and the Minister’s office!

    • Joe says:

      In most cases a bureaucrat has a brain cramp and decides that what Canada really really needs is legislation X. Said bureaucrat then spends a huge amount of time pushing his brain cramp through bureaucratic hoops until the proper moment to produce such legislation. By this time the general populace and the minister has been softened to the idea by endless media hype and the hive mind bureaucrats set their little word processors on HIGH thus the paper begins to be produced. As in any hive mind operation often other ideas some not even close to the original are grafted in to make the legislation more palatable and for the bureaucratic mind, more productive. Eventually the bill is vetted by all the right people and the egotistical minister stands in the Commons and tables the legislation. He didn’t think of it, He may even have originally opposed it but now is his moment in the sunshine and so he struts his stuff. He likely didn’t read it, Coles notes version suffices, and he may not even understand the consequences but this is his moment to shine and he is not going to waste it. Now imagine the fun if the bureaucrats really didn’t like their minister……

  68. MaryT says:

    Whoever started that leak will be found out and the computer and name will be outed.
    Several months ago my server went down for a few days. When trying to get back connected the tech guy took me thru lots of steps. Ended up at my page on the server, name, etc. Listed on that page was every e-mail I had sent or received. A few come thru and were deleted again. But, imagine my surprise when my in box had 2000 unread e-mails from said server. They went back a few years. Sort of fun reading some of them. But when I deleted them they did not show up in deleted file.
    Server guy said he had no control on them being sent again, due to the problems they had when it crashed.

  69. paulsstuff says:

    “When a member of the Minister’s office replies with a telephone call, I take it that there will be no record of the conversation and that the Minister did not receive it, or be aware of the taxpayer’s concerns. Political sabotage, or the Minister is aware and doesn’t care what the taxpayer’s concerns are.”

    You take it wrong. There will be a record of the conversation, including date, time, and details. The majority of time the concerns will be forwarded to the proper department head, in this case CRA. And you can’t be naive enough to believe that the PM himself will call you on your complaint.

    “The CONS might have gotten rid of the registry aspect of the LGR, but gun owners are effectively still registered – by the fact that they are required to maintain an FAC certificate to be compliant with the laws remaining, including the one where police do not require a warrant to kick your door in at 3 am, to search your property for weapons, based on your neighbor’s cries “I saw a gun”.

    Number 1, the FAC is why the CONS (not sure why you continually use caps when using this name, kind of questions your sincerity when claimg to be a supporter), as firearms were registerd through FAC at purchase, and the FAC acted as a screening process for potential buyers. Number 2, if the police receive a report of a possible firearm, their job IS to investigate and ensure public safety is protected.

    “Vic, by his own admission didn’t read his bill in detail before it was released to Parliament” And 308 MP’s never read the fixed-election date legislation. Nor the LGR legislation.

    A question. Don’t you find it odd that whenever this government is mulling over future legislation, the opposition, media, and “experts” come out of the rafters stating it violates the Charter of Rights? If this legislation is as flawed as it’s accused of being, the Supreme Court would quickly point that out.

  70. paulsstuff says:

    “But Section 17 of the ‘Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act’ outlines “exceptional circumstances” under which “any police officer” can ask an ISP to turn over personal client information.

    “I’d certainly like to see an explanation of that,” Toews told host Evan Solomon after a week of public backlash against Bill C-30, which would require internet service providers to turn over client information without a warrant.

    “This is the first time that I’m hearing this somehow extends ordinary police emergency powers [to telecommunications]. In my opinion, it doesn’t. And it shouldn’t.”

    Toews confirmed the bill will be sent to committee before second reading, which he said will allow for the opportunity to amend the bill beyond its original scope.

    Normally, bills would go to committee after a vote at second reading, but that vote sets the scope of amendments that can be made.

    This way, sending the bill to committee before the second reading vote will allow MPs to make broader changes to the legislation.

    According to Toews, the opposition will be able to “bring in as many amendments as they wish to bring forward.”

    “If the opposition is actually really concerned about substantive issues about the bill, and if they bring those forward, I think there will be a very healthy debate,” the minister said.

    So JT, I’d hold off until we see what changes the opposition demands. And I’d also wait for an explanation of the “exceptional circumstances” clause. It might be a clause where the police feel a childs imminent safety and life is at risk, and if that’s the case I think it’s something most Canadians would support.

  71. Joanne says:

    JT, I see you’ve left a comment but I can’t really deal with all this now because of an urgent family matter . Will check in later.

  72. Sandy says:

    Ministers at any level of government depend on public servants and their staff to brief them. Given how busy they are, they just can’t read everything. For the media to suggest that Toews is somehow deficient because he didn’t know a sentence is in the bill that maybe shouldn’t be there is just biased. Liberal Ministers were in exactly the same boat.

    So, why are we not hearing much about Anne McClellan’s Anti-Terrorism Act. It is by far worse as far as personal freedoms. Plus, there was no debate at all on that one. The Chretien gov’t simply used their majority to pass it — using 9/11 as its excuse.

    Hope everything is okay on the home front Joanne. We will be thinking about you.

    • Jen says:

      Sandra, ‘Anne McClellan’s Anti-Terrorism Act. It is by far worse as far as personal freedoms’

      Exact so? please elaborate for my curiousity- ‘how far was far worse’

    • jon says:

      “So, why are we not hearing much about Anne McClellan’s Anti-Terrorism Act. It is by far worse as far as personal freedoms.”

      The Consenus Media is only interested in deploying the ‘Compare and Contrast” template so frequently used by them in their reports (one of about a dozen used) when they feel Libs come out looking good.

      BTW, isn’t it interesting that the Consensus Media claim they don’t make it their business to go into the personal lives of elected officials and staying away from all things salacious while they not only read comments from “Vikileaks” that often get “specific” about Towes but they even continue to zoom in on screen shots of those specifics days AFTER the site has been shut down.

      Funny that when it came to “Whorehouse Jack” they didn’t want to get specific — no mattresses, no tissues. Vague for one, specific details for the other. Worse, cowardly hiding behind the Vikileaks poster to advance commentary that they otherwise can’t as “objective” news outlets…. Hmm, I wonder if a twitter account was opened featuring deatils about the “shiatsu” if they’d zoom right in their for a nice tight shot. Hardly! Unless of course if it was Toews and a shiatsu then, um, yeah.

      Also interesting to note that the Consensus Media — in their panic to mitigate the damage to Layton to try and stop PMSH from getting his majority in the final hours — were angry with the ex-cop from which the documents originated while they’re dismissing the importance of finding the Vikileaks poster… watch the end of CTV’s QP today. A lot of “we don’t really know who it is” and “let’s just all move along” type of commentary.

      Also interesting to note that in their panic about the Layton bombshell at its outset thete was a lot of “how did this get out there?!” and “why is it coming out now?!

  73. maz2 says:

    Any twittering yet ’bout left-liberal Snooper Googoo?

    The faux conservative libertarian/libertines and their left-liberal allies are silent.

    …-

    “Google officials sued over ‘privacy’ tactics”

    “Researchers at Stanford University said Google programmers developed codes that allowed them to avoid privacy settings created by their rivals at Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple.

    The settings were designed to block cookies, or small pieces of code, that can be used to follow users’ activities on the Web. The Wall Street Journal reported Google’s actions in bypassing the privacy settings earlier this week.

    Soble is seeking class-action status for his suit, which was filed on behalf of individuals “whose default privacy settings on the web browser software produced by Apple, known as Safari, were knowingly circumvented by Google,” according to the suit.”

    http://www.theprovince.com/business/Google+officials+sued+over+privacy+tactics/6177049/story.html

  74. Jen says:

    What would Justin do? 170
    A revealing diary entry from Canada’s, um, deepest thinker
    By Lorrie Goldstein ,Toronto Sun
    First posted: Saturday, February 18, 2012 07:14 PM EST

    Dear Diary:

    I, Justin Trudeau, woke up this morning wondering, as I do every morning, what Canada can do for me … Justin Trudeau.

    http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/17/what-would-justin-do

  75. jt says:

    “So, why are we not hearing much about Anne McClellan’s Anti-Terrorism Act. ”

    That would be Bill C-36. Mr Toews was fully in favour of the provisions of that bill: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2001/10/15/terror_law011015.html

  76. maz2 says:

    This helps explicate the virulent hostility/death threats directed at Minister Toews.

    “The real offense in the world today is not to tell the lie, but to refuse to talk in code.”

    Minister Toews did not talk in approved left-liberal code.

    The liberal-left/libertarians are insane. Re-read Kinsella’s words again in this light. Re-read Pony Trudeau’s words.

    …-

    “Play the Game”

    “As an expression of the collective consciousness of the cultural elite, the media’s memes are nothing less than a kind of insanity; a window into an dreamscape in which everything is inverted; where ordinary people are seen as freaks and freaks are seen as paragons of sanity. This is sometimes called alienation; the average person is alien to them and they are alien to the average person.

    Someone observed that the system of political correctness was really a process of encryption. It created code words for everything so the public discourse could be sanitized while allowing every hatred to fester unseen in the settings that were, by common consent, to be left unmonitored. After all, the only way you can keep a plantation system going is to pretend it doesn’t exist.

    Within unmonitored settings people could speak their minds provided they knew how to shut their mouths when entering the public space. If you weren’t already on a plantation then you had to join one quick. Otherwise the system might leak truth.

    Thus public obsession with “racism” or the recent inordinate sensitivity to “religion” does not actually reflect some deep desire to show respect or a rooted sense of shared piety. Instead, it represented an outrage that the hypocrisy is not maintained; that the supports holding up the facade are showing.

    When former press secretary Robert Gibbs said that GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum was “well over the line” for questioning President Obama’s Christian faith, was it because ‘faith’ was so important in the White House? Or was it just one more little prop to beat the other guy over the head with?

    “It’s wrong, it’s destructive and it makes it virtually impossible to solve the problems we face together as Americans,” Gibbs told me in an exclusive interview Sunday on “This Week.” “It’s just time to get rid of this mindset in our politics that if we disagree we have to question character and faith.”

    Nobody can talk about national, religion, patriotism or a personal life unless you happen to truly take it unseriously, otherwise you’re a bigot or worse, a hypocrite. But we’ll all pretend as if we cared.

    In today’s world the most oppressive regimes in the world chair UN committees on human rights, theocracies claim to be “persecuted”; racial supremacists can cry ‘discrimination’ at every turn; and billionaires proclaim themselves champions of the poor. But nobody thinks these absurdities are in the least bit strange; the focus is on what they say. For as long as they deviate not a jot or tittle from the prescribed narrative, then all is well. But once they depart the language of political correctness it is time to break out the tar and feathers. The real offense in the world today is not to tell the lie, but to refuse to talk in code.”

    http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2012/02/19/play-the-game/#more-20557

  77. maz2 says:

    The left-liberal narrative: Sponsored by the Cancer Industry.

    There will be mud on the floor.

    … and in this corner, Our Lil’ Pony. Boinggggg … and they’re off…

    …-

    “Den Tandt: Politicians will duke it out in the ring for cancer foundation”

    http://www.canada.com/news/Tandt+Politicians+will+duke+ring+cancer+foundation/6177798/story.html

  78. Richco says:

    O/T – Ontario politics – Liberal/NDP Coalition? Maybe.
    http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/19/a-recipe-for-political-dynamite

    • Liz J says:

      I’d say this is a likely scenario, an NDP-Liberal shack-up, birds of a feather will fly together. McGuinty knows it too, he knows there’s no chance of the NDP and Conservatives linking up to boot his sorry ass out, his arrogance will march on and we will pay for it for decades to come.

      • Richco says:

        Yep, with both kids graduating university this year and heading out of Ontario, the idea of these empty-nesters taking a serious look at where our money’s going to go farthest, we’re considering our options. Ontario has been my home all of my life, but I’m willing to leave it. How many more like me?

        • Liz J says:

          There are a lot of people leaving Ontario, we have a neighbour trying to sell their home, the husband has already left for a job in Calgary.
          It seems a shame we get chased out of our homes and home province by a weasel politician but we have to survive.

          We need to somehow force an election, we had no inkling of just how bad things were at election time, McLiar was running on lies and hiding the real hard facts from us. That alone should be grounds for an do-over election.

          As for saying McLiar should clean up his own mess, no, it’s obvious he’s not going to, we need a new broom.

  79. Joanne says:

    You want to “filter” out comments, be my guest, it’s your blog Jo.

    Jt – That is the last sentence in your comment that is still in the pending filter. (I released the other one that was in there.)

    Having had the time to read through everything again this morning, I want to explain what I mean by ‘personal attacks’. I have no problem with readers here criticizing politicians as long as it’s done in a non-litigious way (i.e. I don’t want to be sued).

    However let’s please use discretion with how we deal with the views of other commenters with whom we don’t agree. We can still have a respectful debate if we challenge the argument without having to cast aspersions on the person that said it.

    Yes it’s my blog, and that’s how I run it. There are others out there that are more of a free-for-all and anyone is welcome to go there.

    • Joanne says:

      And just to be clear – I have no problem with conservatives reaming their own party when it goes astray. Let’s just do it in a facts-based, logical manner. Thank you.

  80. fh says:

    Joanne please continue to filter messages you do not need to provide anyone including myself with a means to spout their opinion
    thank you for allowing me to put messages on your Blog I consider it a privilege
    I don’t expect everyone to agree with me and I don’t expect you to agree with me
    let me know your opinion and why you disagree that is debate at its best
    you do not need to explain why to anyone IMHO
    fh

    • Joanne says:

      Thanks Fh. I only ask that everyone stay respectful of others’ opinions, even if we don’t always agree.

  81. fh says:

    The only reason Dalton would form a coalition which should include Cabinet positions for NDP would be so he can keep spending and blame the NDP
    IMHO
    fh

    • Joanne says:

      Just read Blizzard’s column which Richco has linked to earlier in this thread.

      McGuinty’s perfect alibi would be ‘The Dippers made me do it”.

      One problem though – The Moody’s warning. If McGuinty goes that route and our credit rating is slashed, we’ll been in a hell-hole like you’ve never seen before.

    • Jen says:

      Dalton has no intentions of taking the full blame of his own doing…. so, clever Dalton might push for a coalition so as to weazle out and probably point fingers at the NDP since he and canadians know how the NDP like to spend and, are closer to the union base than liberals are. If the ndp aren’t careful they will be blamed.

      • Richco says:

        I can see this being Dalton’s plan very easily. All the while he’s thinking he’s sliding under the radar of public opinion….but he’s not, far from it.

        I just had a thought about how Dalton might play this IF he has intentions of being the leader of the LPOC someday and merging the two parties with his party-mate Bob Rae? Talk about a loser combo for Ontario. One the Premier who sunk the province as we’ve never experienced before, the other, the Premier who outdid him – McGuinty.

        • Jen says:

          And, both parties will use the media like a see-saw:
          The libs will accuse the ndp and the ndp will accuse the libs and the media too chicken sh=tackle either party will accuse the cons instead. In fact, the media are doing it right now Richco.

    • wilson says:

      Dippers want to swallow up what shred of support the LPC has left in the West.
      LPC falls for this trick and they are toast in the West, forever.
      And 2 elections down the road, with this loser approach, the LPC in the East will be gone too.

      The LPC spawned this kind of hatred towards PM Harper and our govt,
      now they can’t manage the unintended consequences.

      • Joanne says:

        I read in our local paper that there was a meeting Thursday in Waterloo about this. I haven’t been able to find the article online but it was titled “Co-operation in select ridings can defeat Tories”.
        (Waterloo Record – Local Feb. 17).

        The plan seems to be to defeat the Tories in ridings where a split would otherwise cause a Tory to be elected. Then use the resulting coalition to get rid of FPTP and put in proportion rep.

        Boy I wish I could find a link to that article. In any case they’re organizing now for the next election.

        One quote: “I feel that we’re on a rescue mission and we have to rescue democracy before it’s too late”. (Katherine Acheson, campaign mgr for Lizzy May.)

        This is the group behind it.

  82. wilson says:

    Kinsella has a post up ‘have we created a monster’, referring to how much hatred there is out there….. ‘fight Cons hard ‘attacks gone mad.

    What the H did Kinsella expect would happen when the Libs and their media, and now the NDP, have done NOTHING other than attack PMSH and the Cons govt, since 2003?
    They WANTED the right to be feared, even hated as much as Bush.
    Kinsella and his bunch chose the culture wars and demonization route, and they expect their airhead followers to know where to stop?
    The LibNDP/media attacks got personal a long long time ago.
    Kinsella just noticed?

    The media applauded Ministers of the Crown being called ‘pieces of sh..’ and Honourable A$$h…’ by elected MPs.
    Yah,
    you created a monster Warren and gang.

    • Richco says:

      wilson – on this issue Kinsella’s been pretty consistent about going after a politician’s family. He’s experienced something similar when a conservative blogger, tried to do to WK what the twitter-twit did to Toews.

      He knows it’s wrong, he’s said so many times.

      “have we created a monster” in context I read that to mean that “we” being those who indulge in internet mudslinging, which is, pretty much all of us. Facts or no facts.

      • wilson says:

        ”….But l’affaire Toews suggests that (a) liberals and progressives agree and (b) they’re eager to get even dirtier than the Cons….’

        He’s speaking to his own crowd Richco.

        Again, what did Kinsella and gang expect when they started the demonizing, fear mongering and culture wars,
        eagerly promoted by their media?
        Imo, they got what they wanted, and more.

        • Richco says:

          …and qualified in the line right after that with “Listen to an old man, kids (or, better yet, buy and read my books). Go after your opponent’s public record. Not his or her private life. ”

          That to me doesn’t suggest that Kinsella was party to anything other than by association to his party.

          • Fay says:

            Monster thy name is CTV. All of their political pundits except Tasha have happily pronounced that Vic Toews deserves everything the left twitterverse throws at him .
            Sure looks like black mail to me but no no no , craig oliver proclaims this is the new way for opposition to stop scary Harper.
            Scary!

  83. paulsstuff says:

    ““So, why are we not hearing much about Anne McClellan’s Anti-Terrorism Act. ”

    That would be Bill C-36. Mr Toews was fully in favour of the provisions of that bill:”

    That would be called scoring on your own net jt. Toews has been consistent in his views on what needs to be done to protect Canadians. Liberals are the ones who are hypocrites, actually having the audacity to complaim about Bill C-36 once they were out of office. You don’t like the new legislation, I get that. But before turning on your party, CONS is how I think you refer to it, think about some recent examples that might be comparable.

    1. The opposition and media in a tizzy about the Conservatives wanting to change the rules about SSM. Baseless in fact.

    2. The opposition and media in a tizzy about Conservatives wanting to change abortion laws. Baseless in fact

    3. Wafergate. Baseless in fact. Never happened, but the media ran with it for weeks, turning a blind eye when presented with the truth.

    4. The Caterpillar plant closure. Opposition and media in a tizzy about $5 million the Conservatives gave Caterpillar. Again, never happened. Only a handful of journalists saw fit to try and correct the facts, notably Andrew Coyne.

    5. The “exceptional circumstances” clause will need some explanation. As I stated previously, it is most likely to be utilizd when a child’s safety or life is in immenent danger. By the way, in law there is an exceptional circumstances law in place where authorities can already act if there is in fact a situation where a victim’s life may be in jeopardy.

    • Gabby in QC says:

      I hope I’ll be forgiven for breaking my word about not commenting further on this thread … maybe I should have said I would neither comment nor read others’ comments :-)

      Paulsstuff, your argument about the “exceptional circumstances” clause is an excellent one. I don’t know why supposedly highly intelligent pundits didn’t come up with that before you did. My local talk radio jock, a self-declared conservative, thinks the proposed legislation is outrageous. This morning he was ranting about how “ANY police officer” can go in and snoop on ANYONE, ridiculing Minister Toews for admitting he wasn’t aware of a couple of clauses. That shows the level of misunderstanding around this bill.

      However, that kind of misunderstanding, at times willful misrepresentation, doesn’t diminish the need for the government to be perfectly clear about its proposed legislation, without the name-calling or belligerent accusations against its opponents, which are only invitations for the latter to wag their fingers and say “Aha! you see? Mini-Bush!”

  84. paulsstuff says:

    Exactly Gabby. Toews partisan remarks were unjustifiable. I myself would stand in the House, aknowledge the bill in it’s current form is far from perfect, but it’s intention is to stop the perpetrators and users of child pornography. I would then mention the government welcomes any opinions about possible changes or amendments, as a bill dealing with such a reprehensible crime should have unanimous consent in the House.

    By doing this, you focus the publics attention on what the goals of the bill are, and in essence take away the bluster of both the opposition parties and media.

    • Richco says:

      Agree totally Paulstuff. Well said 1:41pm.

    • cantuc says:

      Yeah , it’s enough being a target . You don’t have to load a gun and hand it to your enemies . It takes a lot longer to build trust than it does to kill it .

      • Richco says:

        Harper can’t be too happy about this either, considering how a comment similar to this lost him his first election against Paul Martin.

        Whispers now of a cabinet shuffle.

  85. Joanne says:

    Heading out for a bit of Family Day fun. Will unleash any comments later.

  86. maz2 says:

    Of left-liberal Google.

    Where’s the outrage/fury/contempt from the faux-conservatives? the libertarian libertines? the left-liberals?

    Google attacks/subverts privacy & not a twitter.

    …-

    “Google on its heels after Safari privacy breach”

    “Google has been scrambling to give Internet users more power to block advertisers from tracking their online behaviour, as it seeks to limit the damage from the latest privacy scandal to dent its corporate image.

    As part of the effort, it will adhere to “do not track” requests from individuals when serving up adverts from its own DoubleClick network, according to a person familiar with the plans, a move that would make it the first big online advertising company to limit itself voluntarily in this way.”

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/tech-news/google-on-its-heels-after-safari-privacy-breach/article2342507/

  87. maz2 says:

    Of Left-liberal Google’s dirty tricks.

    Leftists own Cookie Monster is snooping into your privacy.

    Any twits from the left/libertarian libertines/faux conservatives twitting ’bout this?

    …-

    “Google tricks Internet Explorer, foils privacy settings, Microsoft says”

    “Google has secretly been bypassing your privacy settings in Internet Explorer, Microsoft claimed Monday afternoon.

    The startling accusation came in a blog post Monday by Dean Hachamovitch, Microsoft’s corporate vice president for Internet Explorer. On Friday, a Wall Street Journal investigation revealed that the search and advertising giant was bypassing the privacy settings of millions of people using Apple Safari browsers on iPhones and desktop computers.

    “When the IE team heard that Google had bypassed user privacy settings on Safari, we asked ourselves a simple question: is Google circumventing the privacy preferences of Internet Explorer users too?” Hachamovitch wrote.

    “We’ve discovered the answer is yes: Google is employing similar methods to get around the default privacy protections in IE and track IE users with cookies.””

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/20/google-tricks-internet-explorer-foils-privacy-settings-microsoft-says/

  88. Joanne says:

    Memo to Richco – So I was able to find out the ‘Sticky Keys’ is a feature of some versions of Windows and often triggered when you hit certain keys (e.g. the shift key) too many times in a row.

    So nothing to do with this site. ;)

  89. maz2 says:

    Socialist media has been snoopdogging for how long now?

    Wait for the outrage from the Left/libertarian libertines/pseudo-conservatives. Wait and wait and w…..
    …-

    “Not just Google: Facebook also bypasses privacy settings in IE”
    ZDNet”

  90. Joanne says:

    Crazy numbers of comments on this thread. Thank you all for your contributions to the discussion.

    • Bec says:

      ;) brinsg back memories! Great discussion and I have to say how great it is to have Gabby and paulsstuff back! Thanks Joanne!

  91. Liz J says:

    When all is said, can anyone recall an issue that caused such a reaction when the Liberals were in power? If this were a Liberal government would it have come to anything but a bit of whimpering with little coverage by the MSM or is this the worst ever?

    Having threats to cause to the Minister involved and his family with this doesn’t seem a routine Canadian reaction, maybe we nee to be very concerned about that.

    Are we as citizens of Canada in more danger with this bill, or this bill tweaked, than the children used/abused for porn?

  92. Joanne says:

    All good questions Liz. New post up BTW.

  93. Pingback: Bill C-30 – Fix or scrap? | Blue Like You

Comments are closed.