Conservatives keeping list of Jews

[Michael Bluth]

I don't know why this woman has become the sole focus when the article itself has three people in it.

Your remark crosses a line and is inappropriate for this forum.

The thread has been bumped and pushed and cajoled out of all proportion. Now you are complaining that you don't like the direction it is going?

Rue, ignore the attempted level of control on the board. If the mods have an issue with you they will approach you directly.

[jdobbin]

As a Jew I do not have a problem with this at all.

As a poster I think your points and your posts are great and bring up some very good points about privacy.

But sorry, on this one I think the person who turned this into a tempest had an agenda. I may have stated it crudely but I question her agenda. I think she has one.

In this country I have the absolute right to throw such cards in the garbage. I appreciate your point if information is kept on me illegally. But I really do think in this case there are no sinister lists being kept on Jews.

I think all politicians pander. Its what they do. There is nothing sinister about it.

I do appreciate the privacy issues you raise. To me those are a different issue and I take them seriously but for heaven's sake, if someone wants to acknowledge my religion in a positive way I will not get my kosher colon in a twist over it.

I have no problem if political parties keep track of their supporters with consent. The Conservative party is not practicing accepted standards of privacy according to several experts who have been quoted in various links already posted here.

The people who are presently on the list the Tories have compiled should have a right to know how it was compiled and be removed from the list if they so wish. They don't have that right and that is wrong.

[Michael Bluth]

The Conservative party is not practicing accepted standards of privacy according to several experts who have been quoted in various links already posted here.

How about linking to those again? Must we really have the false interpretations everytime you want to push an issue?

The false conjecture?

The Conservatives keep information the same way the Liberals and NDP do.

I know for a fact I have never agreed to be 'franked' by an NDP MP. I don't live in an NDP riding, but it is one of their targets. Any support for my getting unsolicited and unwanted mail dobbin? Probably not, but hey shrewd Liberal supporters see the NDP as an equally big danger to themselves as are the Conservatives.

[jdobbin]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/071022/...atabase_privacy

But Liberals say they have two distinct databases, one paid for by MPs to manage constituent case files and one paid for by the party for partisan purposes.

Although both systems were developed by the AIT Corp., data is not shared between the two. Both systems, AdminElect and ManagElect, are listed on the company web site.

The Conservative system, known as CIMS for Constituent Information Management System, provides a single platform for candidate, MP and party databases.

That's raised concerns that private constituent files are being used by the party for partisan purposes - a charge the Conservatives stoutly deny.

The Tories, unlike the Liberals and NDP, have not agreed to allow individual citizens to see their files from the party database - something that government and private businesses are compelled to do under federal legislation.

Political parties fall into a legal grey area between two separate privacy laws.

The issue came to a head last week after some private citizens complained they had received unsolicited Rosh Hashanah greetings from Prime Minister Stephen Harper last month.

The federal privacy commissioner has launched a preliminary inquiry into how information regarding individuals' religious affiliation came to be attached to a party mailing list.

The Tories tried to paint the Liberals yesterday on this but then didn't answer questions later on about how they keep one database rather than two.

From a few weeks ago:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...18?hub=Politics

"If somebody contacts their MP because they're having a problem with their CPP benefit or their military pension, they don't expect to end up on a mailing list for a political party,'' said David Fraser, a Halifax lawyer who specializes in privacy issues with the firm McInnes Cooper.

"If they are going to end up on a mailing list, I think there's an ethical obligation to inform them and give them the opportunity to opt out.''

Michael Geist, a law professor who serves as the Canada research chair of Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, agrees.

"When you're going to your local MP with a concern or a problem, there is a certain level of confidentiality,'' said Geist.

"The notion that it's simply a data point that gets used to characterize the particular constituent could have a bit of a chilling effect.''

Edited October 23, 2007 by jdobbin

[Rue]

I don't know why this woman has become the sole focus when the article itself has three people in it. Subsequently, there have been others as well who wonder how lists are compiled.

Your remark crosses a line and is inappropriate for this forum.

I have been ordered to censor it and have. What is or is not inappropriate I leave for others to decide. In this case your concern has led to the censorship of my original comment.

The reason why this focuses on this woman is because she wanted it to. If she didn't she would have simply thrown the card in the garbage and expressed any of her alleged concerns without engaging in the tactics she did and I resent them because it embarasses me as a Jew and this woman does not speak for me and I think it is the utmost in trivilization and pettiness and deserves nothing but contempt from moi.

I suppose next we need a Royal Commission of Inquiry to look into this, and a victim's support group for receivers of such cards to be funded of course by the federal government.

Then the federal government can fund an anti-religious card association which can then lobby the government to pass legislation to prevent this from happening again and assuring no religious cards are sent to anyone for any reason by any politician.

Of course we shall send privacy auditors to enter Mr. Harper's offices and look for lists of any name that sounds ethnic and burn them and fine the PC party.

Sounds appropriate.

Peace and love to anyone feeling victimized by religious cards.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Rue

[jbg]

We have no idea how the Tories collected information. We have no idea who they divulge their information to either. If all the forum members just sent you a card to your home address, would that be harmless or would you be concerned how they collected that data and who they might share it with? Would you want your name to be so freely available? Do you want people to make a profile of you without your consent? Would you like the option of getting off a mailing list or a phone list?

I know that the GOC is not a malicious organization. I presume that most on MLW are harmless as well, but I cannot be sure. Thus, what you recite would be far scarier. The members of MLW are by definition anonymous, and the GOC is not. Thus, this is not an "apples to apples" comparison. Edited October 23, 2007 by jbg

[Rue]

The thread has been bumped and pushed and cajoled out of all proportion. Now you are complaining that you don't like the direction it is going?

Rue, ignore the attempted level of control on the board. If the mods have an issue with you they will approach you directly.

I have removed the offending comments. I am the first to admit my humour may not be appreciated. I often find myself annoying.

Now Mr. Bluth I am reminded that just as some of us Hebrews do get nervous when we hear gentiles innunciate the word "juice" or "jewellery" too slowly there are non Hebrews who might get nervous during the summer season when one's backyard becomes innundated with yellow jackets and the cries of "f..cking wasps!" can be heard.

We do need to be sensitive to one another.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Rue

[old_bold&cold]

I have removed the offending comments. I am the first to admit my humour may not be appreciated. I often find myself annoying.

Now Mr. Bluth I am reminded that just as some of us Hebrews do get nervous when we hear gentiles innunciate the word "juice" or "jewellery" too slowly there are non Hebrews who might get nervous during the summer season when one's backyard becomes innundated with yellow jackets and the cries of "f..cking wasps!" can be heard.

We do need to be sensitive to one another.

Hey I have been over the line many times and yes I have been told a time or two to edit this and that. But I also know that sometimes we let tempers get the better, and type more heated then common sense dictates. No problem, from my little corner.

I do wonder though, maybe if I send Harper a christmas card with my return address will I get one back? I probably would and if I was even to go as far as to sent Easter and other greetings, I bet you would would also get one back from him. Maybe we should all do this just to see. The jewish people can send cards well ahead of their holidays, and then see if they get one back. After that do not send one to him until he sends one to you, just to see that you are now on a list for holiday greetings. We could do this with the GG as well. I am willing to bet that this will prove to be right. Maybe we have some Greek holidays coming up or even other religions. I will bet you that you will get a return card from Harper and Family.

This will prove that the cards are harmless, and just done in what people would call good taste. Plus you will have a souveneir for later on in life. The only point then that would remain is how did they get the list that has caused all the trouble? The answer could be as simple as a firend or neighbour could have thought that you would have liked this, or maybe a rival thought to do this was a good joke. But when wishing a holiday greeting to anyone becomes something to have inquiries about, then we need a mental health check on those involved.

Edited October 23, 2007 by old_bold&cold

[jdobbin]

I have been ordered to censor it and have. What is or is not inappropriate I leave for others to decide. In this case your concern has led to the censorship of my original comment.

The reason why this focuses on this woman is because she wanted it to. If she didn't she would have simply thrown the card in the garbage and expressed any of her alleged concerns without engaging in the tactics she did and I resent them because it embarasses me as a Jew and this woman does not speak for me and I think it is the utmost in trivilization and pettiness and deserves nothing but contempt from moi.

I suppose next we need a Royal Commission of Inquiry to look into this, and a victim's support group for receivers of such cards to be funded of course by the federal government.

Then the federal government can fund an anti-religious card association which can then lobby the government to pass legislation to prevent this from happening again and assuring no religious cards are sent to anyone for any reason by any politician.

Of course we shall send privacy auditors to enter Mr. Harper's offices and look for lists of any name that sounds ethnic and burn them and fine the PC party.

Thank you for your edit. Sexist terminology just demeans and insults people and I don't think that is what you intended to say.

As for the rest of your commentary, I think it trivializes the issue of privacy which is a major concern. The Tory list does not follow accepted practices of privacy and the fact that some people are laughing at people who do not wish to receive unsolicited mail makes me wonder. Are you of the same opinion on the "Do not call" list for telephone solicitation?

[jdobbin]

I know that the GOC is not a malicious organization. I presume that most on MLW are harmless as well, but I cannot be sure. Thus, what you recite would be far scarier. The members of MLW are by definition anonymous, and the GOC is not. Thus, this is not an "apples to apples" comparison.

I think any information that is gathered where you do not have the option of seeing, changing or deleting it is an invasion of privacy. I don't think it is harmless because we don't know who will see that data or who it will be shared with.

[Rue]

Hey I have been over the line many times and yes I have been told a time or two to edit this and that.

Hey Old bet you would never see me defending the Conservatives huh? admit it. But fair is fair. Lol.

[Rue]

Thank you for your edit. Sexist terminology just demeans and insults people and I don't think that is what you intended to say.

As for the rest of your commentary, I think it trivializes the issue of privacy which is a major concern. The Tory list does not follow accepted practices of privacy and the fact that some people are laughing at people who do not wish to receive unsolicited mail makes me wonder. Are you of the same opinion on the "Do not call" list for telephone solicitation?

You are right. Thanks. I meant no disrespect to women at all. I use the same Freudian comments to men. I forget its taken as sexually offensive. I hate all humans equally. That said, I should have simply stated she has too much time on her hands. But getting back to the other part of your issue which I am being serious on does it really trivilaize the privacy issue? That is what I am questioning you on now. I am not sure if it does. In fact maybe it does precisely because she has made an issue of such a trivial issue and it focuses away from more serious issues as to privacy.

Again I keep repeating what Leafless says (he must be having a good laugh at that) but do you really think this was anything more then someone looking for Jewish sounding names from an electroral list? You really believe the PC party keeps lists of people based on ethnicity?

First of all how would they do that? Get it from B'nai B'Rith or Canadian Jewish Congress? Such organizations would never do such a thing. Seriously.

So I am serious now, you really believe someone's privacy was deliberately violated? I just don't see it.

To me its a basic issue of ethnic pandering that all politicians do and with due respect I think is what they should do. I don't see that as a bad thing at all its not meant to be anything but

acknowledge who people are. Its just being polite or sensitive or what-ever other sweet word we want to use. Is it manipulative? Why?

Are you manipulative if you wish me Rosh Hashanah? Am I manipulative because I say Merry Christmas? I mean where do we draw the line with common courtesy.

Can I also tell you something else-I don't think for a second we Jewish people are so stupid that we will only vote for Harper because he sends us A Rosh Hashanah card and I do not think for a second he does either. I mean he may have a fat head but come on.

When we Jews vote its not simply because someone is pro-Israel or sends us a card. We have many reasons but please don't ask me to think the Tories were being anti-semitic or manipulative simply because they showed some sensitivity and ethnic pandering. That is their job to pander to people. Pandering can be insincere and maybe syrupy and smarmy but that is what politicians do.

I criticize Harper on some issues as Old and Bold knows I think he's a crass manipulator when it comes to law and order and senate reform. On the other hand, I find his foreign policy and handling of Afghanistan freshreshingly blunt and direct and a hell of a lot more honest then the LIberals. He could have but chooses not to couch his words with certain unpopular issues.

So I mean to me he has good and bad things. I don't like his Trudeau like arrogance. I don't like his insincerity over certain issues but on others I find him blunt and candid. I will criticize the man and his party but on the merit of their issues not on something like this. Its a cheap shot.

The way I was brough up if for what-ever reason someone is polite to you, you don't snap at them and accuse them of being a pervert because they smiled at you. Not everyone who smiles is a pervert. Some of them may simply have gas or are trying to be polite or their dentures don't fit.

[Michael Bluth]

Again I keep repeating what Leafless says (he must be having a good laugh at that) but do you really think this was anything more then someone looking for Jewish sounding names from an electroral list? You really believe the PC party keeps lists of people based on ethnicity?

First of all how would they do that? Get it from B'nai B'Rith or Canadian Jewish Congress? Such organizations would never do such a thing. Seriously.

They do have lists based on ethnicity and so does every other party.

It filters up. You have Jewish supporters in your riding, they help the riding association identify the Jewish voters. Voter identification better helps deliver targeted messages.

[jdobbin]

I am not sure if it does. In fact maybe it does precisely because she has made an issue of such a trivial issue and it focuses away from more serious issues as to privacy.

Again I keep repeating what Leafless says (he must be having a good laugh at that) but do you really think this was anything more then someone looking for Jewish sounding names from an electroral list? You really believe the PC party keeps lists of people based on ethnicity?

First of all how would they do that? Get it from B'nai B'Rith or Canadian Jewish Congress? Such organizations would never do such a thing. Seriously.

So I am serious now, you really believe someone's privacy was deliberately violated? I just don't see it.

To me its a basic issue of ethnic pandering that all politicians do and with due respect I think is what they should do. I don't see that as a bad thing at all its not meant to be anything but

acknowledge who people are. Its just being polite or sensitive or what-ever other sweet word we want to use. Is it manipulative? Why?

Are you manipulative if you wish me Rosh Hashanah? Am I manipulative because I say Merry Christmas? I mean where do we draw the line with common courtesy.

Can I also tell you something else-I don't think for a second we Jewish people are so stupid that we will only vote for Harper because he sends us A Rosh Hashanah card and I do not think for a second he does either. I mean he may have a fat head but come on.

When we Jews vote its not simply because someone is pro-Israel or sends us a card. We have many reasons but please don't ask me to think the Tories were being anti-semitic or manipulative simply because they showed some sensitivity and ethnic pandering. That is their job to pander to people. Pandering can be insincere and maybe syrupy and smarmy but that is what politicians do.

I criticize Harper on some issues as Old and Bold knows I think he's a crass manipulator when it comes to law and order and senate reform. On the other hand, I find his foreign policy and handling of Afghanistan freshreshingly blunt and direct and a hell of a lot more honest then the LIberals. He could have but chooses not to couch his words with certain unpopular issues.

So I mean to me he has good and bad things. I don't like his Trudeau like arrogance. I don't like his insincerity over certain issues but on others I find him blunt and candid. I will criticize the man and his party but on the merit of their issues not on something like this. Its a cheap shot.

The way I was brough up if for what-ever reason someone is polite to you, you don't snap at them and accuse them of being a pervert because they smiled at you. Not everyone who smiles is a pervert. Some of them may simply have gas or are trying to be polite or their dentures don't fit.

Your focus on one person in the article is surprising because there have been a few quoted in the article and a few in follow-up articles.

I have questioned the use of profiles, how they are compiled, how they are used and how they stored. What are the options for people who don't want to be on the list? None, according to the Tory office. You can't have your name removed, adjusted or see for yourself what your profile says. This is standard practice according to privacy experts.

No one knows how the lists were compiled but some people are surprised to be on lists after visiting their MP's office for constituency business. The fact that being on the list there seems to automatically transfer you to the political list is not good. If it comes from passport applications, even worse.

Given identity theft and use of identity for purposes of solicitation, it seems the best privacy practices should be put into place and are not. If government information is being used to compile these lists or if organizations which are governed by the privacy act are sharing information with the Tories, they are in violation of Privacy Act.

There is no harm in sending or greeting someone if you know them and have consent to do so. Unsolicited mail based on profiling is wrong and in some cases could be illegal depending on how the information was acquired.

[old_bold&cold]

JD you have taken the tiniest sliver of an issue with this and have made way too much of it. You say it is against the privacy act, and the rest say no. Since there never was or is going to be any complaint to the privacy commission, then we will never know. But we get your point after you saying for 21 pages of mindless tripe. You think it against the privacy act. Well get this person to make a complaint or you make one on her behalf, or just admit you will never agree and let this whole absolutely stupid, assine debate, come to an end. Befor anyone else responds I think we should all just walk away and show JD just how wrong this whole thing is.

[guyser]

JD you have taken the tiniest sliver of an issue with this and have made way too much of it. You say it is against the privacy act, and the rest say no. Since there never was or is going to be any complaint to the privacy commission, then we will never know. But we get your point after you saying for 21 pages of mindless tripe. You think it against the privacy act. Well get this person to make a complaint or you make one on her behalf, or just admit you will never agree and let this whole absolutely stupid, assine debate, come to an end. Befor anyone else responds I think we should all just walk away and show JD just how wrong this whole thing is.

I suppose one could walk away but frankly I do not think dobbin wrong. Perhaps a bit excessive since no complaint has come forward, but the point of it being against the privacy act is well founded.

We know that the gov cannot access info inter-agency. IOW a minister or your local MP cannot access your health records at Health Canada. The tax man cant say to the passport office that they shouldnt grant a passport because of "X".

So, lets turn this around and look at it from another angle. If the info was garnered fairly then the PC 's could have easily given that info up and no story. Perhaps they did get it thru public domain and want the Libs to squirm for their own shits and giggles. It seems Chretien was not above that (Martin? and not stepping down) and I have no doubt likely did something similar. Maybe a little tit for tat. I dont know, and apparetnly neither does anyone else here.

So, lets assume prior to the last election that Martin got a hold of every new immigrant in the past five years and saw to it that these immigrants were reminded who granted status to them.This would be info he should not have according to the privacy act.

Well, the PC supporters would go ballistic , and rightly so .

As it is, the list of jewish ethnicity is not exactly the same as an immigrant list, but there are myriad ways that one can abuse a list that they have no business knowing.

[betsy]

Today, MDuffy and the press gallery called this attempt to dig up controversy over the Conservative database by the Liberals as....petty.

There you go. Even the press aren't buying it! The Liberals only end up looking so desperate.

[jdobbin]

JD you have taken the tiniest sliver of an issue with this and have made way too much of it. You say it is against the privacy act, and the rest say no. Since there never was or is going to be any complaint to the privacy commission, then we will never know. But we get your point after you saying for 21 pages of mindless tripe. You think it against the privacy act. Well get this person to make a complaint or you make one on her behalf, or just admit you will never agree and let this whole absolutely stupid, assine debate, come to an end. Befor anyone else responds I think we should all just walk away and show JD just how wrong this whole thing is.

This is before the Privacy Commissioner so I am not sure what you are talking about when you say there has not been a complaint. There have been a number of people who received the card who wanted to know how they got on the list.

If you want to walk away from this thread, by all means. I certainly am not going to send up updates unsolicited. However, this is obviously something that the Tories are squirming on otherwise Peter Van Loan wouldn't have mentioned the political parties having lists but refusing to answer questions about why the Conservative office doesn't keep separate lists like the NDP and Liberals do.

[jdobbin]

Today, MDuffy and the press gallery called this attempt to dig up controversy over the Conservative database by the Liberals as....petty.

There you go. Even the press aren't buying it! The Liberals only end up looking so desperate.

Since the press seems to know little about privacy, I wouldn't really expect anything less.

[jdobbin]

I suppose one could walk away but frankly I do not think dobbin wrong. Perhaps a bit excessive since no complaint has come forward, but the point of it being against the privacy act is well founded.

Complaints about the mailings is why the Privacy Commissioner is investigating now. I haven't seen what his conclusion is.

[Moxie]

Oh my gawd, the cons have me on a mailing list. I might get a Holiday Card (Christmas Card is so passe and unmulticulturally acceptable). Sorry I'd like to type more but I need to dig a bunker so Harper can't find me at Holiday Time (Sorry if that offends the hard left I didn't say that dreaded evil word CHRISTMASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS).

This issue is a non-issue but hay on a slow day the useful idiot needs a hobby instead of a job. I bought a magazine from a local school gal, lo and behold I've been flooded with junk mail. I didn't give persmission for them to give out my post office box, I'm gonna sueeeeeeeee. Canada Post, last year, sold all the personal info they had on their clients and did so with impunity. Should I sue?

[jdobbin]

Oh my gawd, the cons have me on a mailing list. I might get a Holiday Card (Christmas Card is so passe and unmulticulturally acceptable). Sorry I'd like to type more but I need to dig a bunker so Harper can't find me at Holiday Time (Sorry if that offends the hard left I didn't say that dreaded evil word CHRISTMASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS).

This issue is a non-issue but hay on a slow day the useful idiot needs a hobby instead of a job. I bought a magazine from a local school gal, lo and behold I've been flooded with junk mail. I didn't give persmission for them to give out my post office box, I'm gonna sueeeeeeeee. Canada Post, last year, sold all the personal info they had on their clients and did so with impunity. Should I sue?

You should have checked when you bought the magazine. Most have in the fine print that subscribing gives consent for you to be contacted by their advertisers.

As for Canada Post, they got into trouble with the Privacy Commissioner about giving people your forwarding mail address without permission. You can contact Canada Post and have your name removed from any unsolicited mailings. You have no such rights over the Conservative profiling.

Edited October 25, 2007 by jdobbin

[guyser]

This issue is a non-issue but hay on a slow day the useful idiot needs a hobby instead of a job. I bought a magazine from a local school gal, lo and behold I've been flooded with junk mail. I didn't give persmission for them to give out my post office box, I'm gonna sueeeeeeeee. Canada Post, last year, sold all the personal info they had on their clients and did so with impunity. Should I sue?

You consented when you bought the mags from the girl. You did give permission.

Uh, speaking of useful idiots..............

This is what a lot of you have been saying. That plus "I got Merry Xmas or Happy easter" said to them as confirmation that info is out there.

Those are private ocurrences said to one person,an assumption made by one private individual to you.

It does not equate to recieving cards in the mail expressing private info. Is the case petty? Pretty much.

[jbg]

This issue is a non-issue but hay on a slow day the useful idiot needs a hobby instead of a job.

This issue is certainly not worth 20 pages.

[jdobbin]

This issue is certainly not worth 20 pages.

You can always stop replying.