Conservatives keeping list of Jews

[Fain]

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...c8e&k=58596

Unsolicited mail that seems to comes from lists people keep makes a lot of people nervous. The fact that the Tories are keeping lists of Jews is rather disturbing.

With issues like the environment, debt reduction and the economy you chose to instead talk bout trash like this??? congrats dumbass

[jdobbin]

If you read further in the post you'll see I agree with you.

I saw that you agreed with what I said.

Personal information cannot and should not thought of as public domain just because a family member or friend has supplied it to a third party. I'd be concerned about any company, organization or government group keeping or making a profile of a person for the purpose of soliciting them.

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

I find it very hard to believe anyone with even a grade 10 education in Canada would claim ignorance of what "a list of jews" actually denotes. jdobbin are you honestly unaware of the 'Eichman lists of jews' during the Nazi regime? Somehow I think not and that you are perfectly aware of what your "list of jews" actually conveys. Rather insensitive on your part.

By the way how embarrassing it may be for the Ms. K. when she finds out her jewish Mama enters her name and those of her grandkids on various lists. Jewish mamas tend to be upset if and when their kid attempts to deny their jewish faith.

`

I am not ignorant of what some people are trying to evoke with their link to Nazis. However, I have never said anywhere that this was a list of persecution.

And if the entire idea of a list of Jewish people is insensitive, then the Tories should have been aware of it when they began to collect profiles of Jewish people without consent.

And once again, let me repeat, I don't think that personal information given by friends or family should be used without consent for the purposes of soliciting.

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

[Michael Bluth]

I find it very hard to believe anyone with even a grade 10 education in Canada would claim ignorance of what "a list of jews" actually denotes. jdobbin are you honestly unaware of the 'Eichman lists of jews' during the Nazi regime? Somehow I think not and that you are perfectly aware of what your "list of jews" actually conveys. Rather insensitive on your part.

Incredibly insensitive.

As per the rules it has been sent to the moderators for resolution.

No response yet, so that may mean that the op gets away with this one. Not really sure though. Guess all we can do is wait and see.

[jbg]

How are you left-wing again?

On just about every issue, I am in favor of policies that allow people the opportunity to exit poverty and work/earn to their potential, regardless of ancestral class, racial or religious distinctions. Right-wingers, to me, are the people siccing German shephards on peaceful blacks wanting to attend classes, or murdering peaceful civil rights workers and throwing their bodies under bridges to rot.

People who call themselves "left-wing" these days are a pure obstruction to progress. People who support policies that drain moneys to worthless international bureaucracies such as the UN, to feed the idle, rich delegates, and who support upending land titles, are the true reactionaries.

[jbg]

I find it very hard to believe anyone with even a grade 10 education in Canada would claim ignorance of what "a list of jews" actually denotes. jdobbin are you honestly unaware of the 'Eichman lists of jews' during the Nazi regime? Somehow I think not and that you are perfectly aware of what your "list of jews" actually conveys. Rather insensitive on your part.

By the way how embarrassing it may be for the Ms. K. when she finds out her jewish Mama enters her name and those of her grandkids on various lists. Jewish mamas tend to be upset if and when their kid attempts to deny their jewish faith.

`

Godwin's Law at work. When you run out of things with merit to say....

[Shakeyhands]

From the rules of the board:

The title, posted in the way it was, served no constructive purpose over substituting 'a religious group' for Jews.

It is definitely a decision that needs to be made.

There are a number of people in this thread who took offence to the title. Maybe it's time for resolution...

I think you are way off on this one, seriously. Also, I doubt you objected the the Sneaky Buggers title. Very selective.

Stating facts is not against the board rules. Your panties are in a knot because its tied to the CPC.

That is all.

[old_bold&cold]

I am finding this hard to believe that people are still gooing on with this thread. It probably has been repeated over and over. JD will not admit to being wrong in any of this, and that is his bad. He deminishes himself more with every post. I do not see there being any real fallout for this kind of thing for Harper, but yes, it is obvious that the Liberal slant in all of this has backfired. Even they have given up on this.

It is sad that in todays times, where we are supposed to be open minded and free thinking, that this kind of thing can even make the papers. We have people who take the privacy laws way further then they were designed to be taken, and then misuse these to explain bad behaviour. Wishing people a happy (whatever religious holiday) is not and never should it be an invasion of privacy. You have to really start to think about the menality of those who see spookes and alteior motives behind these cards. Most of them have never lived through the times in Nazi Germany, when there were lists, that later were used to round up the jews, but they all say they have been taught that this can be a bad thing. This kind of thread only serves to reinforce those teachngs, when really, there is nothing even close to that happening. JD is just trying to save face, and taken a completely ridiculous stance, that he knows no can truly disprove equivocally, but one that can only be used, if we strtech the law passed its noram boundaries. He will sit there and repeat his mantra over and over, no matter who or what we say to him. He is a liberal supportter and has been a good source for opposing view of this forum, longer then I have been here. He has now lost a lot of respect that he held, for this very thread. I would assume that he would like it to die, but yes he has to keep getting in the last post. So we are now at 14+ pages of "no I am not, you are " type loop. This is going to be my last post in this thread, and I hope it dies soon, as it really does not add much of anything to the forums.

Edited October 11, 2007 by old_bold&cold

[ScottSA]

I am a left-wing Jew and I suport Harper's positions all the way on Israel issues.

The good thing about conservative politicians like Harper is that they are not afraid to stand up for things. Sure, as politicians in a democracy they have to bend a little on issues, sometimes even on big issues like the scam orchestrated by Suzuki and Gore, but on issues of right and wrong, they're a whole lot less transigent than liberals.

I remember when Israel finally said enough is enough and shaved Hezbollah's tail in Lebanon...amoral Liberal pragmatism never crawled out from under its rock so obviously as when the CBC, used to years of cynical vote pandering by the Liberals, pronounced it a "mistake" for Harper to support Israel, because there were more Arabs in Canada.

[Canadian Blue]

sometimes even on big issues like the scam orchestrated by Suzuki and Gore, but on issues of right and wrong, they're a whole lot less transigent than liberals.

Not to mention the radical liberal group known as "scientists".

I remember when Israel finally said enough is enough and shaved Hezbollah's tail in Lebanon...

I believe that support for Hezbollah actually increased due to the bombing. If anything it added fuel to the fire, so perhaps they should have chose a seperate solution.

[JB Globe]

On just about every issue, I am in favor of policies that allow people the opportunity to exit poverty and work/earn to their potential, regardless of ancestral class, racial or religious distinctions.

Well, this doesn't mean you're left OR right-wing, it just means you're for an equal marketplace for workers.

Right-wingers, to me, are the people siccing German shephards on peaceful blacks wanting to attend classes, or murdering peaceful civil rights workers and throwing their bodies under bridges to rot.

Careful with the black and white generalizations. If you're gonna automatically lump racists in with Republicans, than you gotta automatically lump Stalin in with the NDP.

People who call themselves "left-wing" these days are a pure obstruction to progress. People who support policies that drain moneys to worthless international bureaucracies such as the UN, to feed the idle, rich delegates, and who support upending land titles, are the true reactionaries.

So, you're not left-wing after all, I take it?

[Shakeyhands]

Incredibly insensitive.

As per the rules it has been sent to the moderators for resolution.

No response yet, so that may mean that the op gets away with this one. Not really sure though. Guess all we can do is wait and see.

Thats fantastic!

[jdobbin]

I am finding this hard to believe that people are still gooing on with this thread. It probably has been repeated over and over. JD will not admit to being wrong in any of this, and that is his bad. He deminishes himself more with every post. I do not see there being any real fallout for this kind of thing for Harper, but yes, it is obvious that the Liberal slant in all of this has backfired. Even they have given up on this.

I don't know how advocating for privacy wrong. You think it is harmless. I don't think it is. You are welcome to your opinion on it but let's be clear: I never said there was ulterior motives behind the mailings other than to curry favour with the Jewish community.

Lists compiled without consent for the purposes of soliciting are an invasion of your privacy. If a friend in these forums passed on your name, address, place you worked and religion and you started receiving mail from a third party in the forums, would you think your privacy was invaded?

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

Godwin's Law at work. When you run out of things with merit to say....

Privacy has no merit? If someone you knew was to pass your name and address on to someone else in these forums, would that be an invasion of your privacy? Would that not concern you in the least? Is what your friends say to someone else about you or where you work in the public domain?

[Michael Bluth]

I don't know how advocating for privacy wrong.

Privacy has no merit?

Nobody has questioned the privacy angle.

They have questioned why you used "Jews" instead of 'religious group', 'special interest group', 'community or any other term that would not have lead the thread title to have been as inflammatory as it is.

[jdobbin]

Thats fantastic!

The moderators have been doing a fair job of dealing with inflammatory posts and posts where insults are being made. They've been pretty clear what the rules are and have given helpful advice of issues regarding technical aspects of the list and in posts in general. They are usually quite direct in what they think is inflammatory and what is not and I respect them for that.

[Michael Bluth]

The moderators have been doing a fair job of dealing with inflammatory posts and posts where insults are being made. They've been pretty clear what the rules are and have given helpful advice of issues regarding technical aspects of the list and in posts in general. They are usually quite direct in what they think is inflammatory and what is not and I respect them for that.

They have. This is an example of where their guidance is needed. A number of posters have taken objection to the thread title and the OP has chosen to keep the thread alive by repeatedly feigning ignorance as to the source of these objections.

Better the moderators decide than more bandwidth be used up in this unique little dance.

[Shakeyhands]

Well this is interesting... wonder where it will go.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/265982

“We’ve begun preliminary inquiries as a result of the complaints,” Colin McKay, a spokesman for Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, said today.

“We’re interested in where the mailing came from, and what information was used to compile the lists. This mailing may not fall under the jurisdiction of the Privacy Act if it did not use public resources.”

Edited October 11, 2007 by Shakeyhands

[capricorn]

Well this is interesting... wonder where it will go.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/265982

This is from Shakeyhands linked article:

Some of the recipients complained to news media that they had no idea how they came to be on a mailing list based on their religious affiliation.

The Prime Minister’s Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Liberal MP Marlene Jennings is among those requesting an investigation, saying she believes the mailing violates the privacy rights of those who received the greeting.

“It appears the privacy of these individuals has been violated but that is what I want the privacy commissioner to determine, so that if the prime minister is compiling lists of Canadians by their religious or ethnic affiliation, it doesn’t happen again,” said Jennings.

“We’ve begun preliminary inquiries as a result of the complaints,” Colin McKay, a spokesman for Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, said today.

The way I read it, the complaints were made by Jennings, a third party, and not by any greeting card recipient allegedly offended by receiving it? By her actions, is Jennings in fact not invading their privacy? I know I would strongly object if someone filed a complaint on my behalf without my consent and an investigation ensued.

The privacy commissioner's office also appears to be saying the preliminary enquiries are undertaken as the result of the media story. This is another case where I would object if a government agency began an enquiry on a matter affecting me personally without my consent.

[Michael Bluth]

Privacy has no merit?

To quote Shakey's article.

This mailing may not fall under the jurisdiction of the Privacy Act if it did not use public resources.

So I guess there goes your argument on that one.

Just *scary* *scary* *scary* without regard to decency or respect. Good thing there hasn't been a ruling yet on this travesty of a thread.

[Canuck E Stan]

New thread title:

Conservatives keeping list of Jews

sending unsolicited mail on Jewish holiday

That's better.

[guyser]

To quote Shakey's article."This mailing may not fall under ..."

Just *scary* *scary* *scary* without regard to decency or respect. Good thing there hasn't been a ruling yet on this travesty of a thread.

Not so fast MB.

Did you not read the "may" that is in the title?

The resouces I have in my office are not public, yet I can be charged for using them for purposes other than we spell out to our clients.

As for your scary scary....the PM as a person gets no more respect than the average citizen gets. If he is a doofus , so be it. When he looks like a doofus so be it. When he shines he shines.

Dont confuse the Office of The Prime Minister with Stevie.

[jdobbin]

New thread title:

That's better.

I don't know if that will satisfy very many people but for better or worse, there it is.

[Guest coot]

Right-wingers, to me, are the people siccing German shephards on peaceful blacks wanting to attend classes, or murdering peaceful civil rights workers and throwing their bodies under bridges to rot.

That's pretty insulting to a large group of people. Way more offensive than the original thread title, I'd say.

[Shakeyhands]

The way I read it, the complaints were made by Jennings, a third party, and not by any greeting card recipient allegedly offended by receiving it?

The issue never really has been with people being offended or not IMV, its always been about how the list was put together and if thats contrary to the Privacy Act and why its ok for a political party to use said list IF it is contratry to act.