Wild Bill Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) No one has pointed out one thing this group has done which is wrong. They have information on Vic Toews, is this information the public shouldn't know? Who knows however they know it and they are saying they will release it unless they get there way. Your problem is they are doing it publicly? Is it better they sent him a letter or made a private phone call? If Vic did something illegal or morally wrong this group isn't the only one who know about it and they aren't the only ones giving him an ultimatum. punked, you completely missed my point! You really should read the thread before you make such statements! Who cares if they reveal their info? Vic is a politician! Bury him in his own dirt, I say! The issue is that Anonymous is using it as blackmail to get the government to withdraw the Bill and have Vic resign! Plus a few more demands of the same sort. This is what disgusts me! Who appointed Anonymous as our head of government? When do I get to vote for any of them? What happens when the next issue is something that perhaps some of today's supporters don't agree with at that time? I've made my position clear in earlier posts. Some seem to support Anonymous as a sort of benevolent dictator that as far as Vic and his crime Bill are concerned is on their side so they see nothing wrong with what they are doing. As I said, if the shoe is on the other foot with the next issue it would be interesting to see how today's supporters handle it! Talk about your situational ethics! Or rather, a total lack of ethics, replaced by blind partisanship! Again, if they want to hang Vic I might buy the rope! It's just as a libertarian when some vigilante political group wants to use blackmail for their own political ends I truly start to fear for my country! Anonymous should just reveal everything they have on Vic! Or any other politician, for that matter. I would hope they would not be partisan about it but after this I won't hold my breath. Edited February 26, 2012 by Wild Bill Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 I always wondered why Anonymous used the Guy Fawkes mask as a “figurehead”?………Kind of ironic and fitting all at once, that a guy that tried to interrupt Parliamentary proceedings, was caught, tried in the Star Chamber, then Drawn and Quartered, is their proverbial folk hero………Perhaps Reform CPC should re-examine their once proposed idea of bringing back the Death Penalty………. It’s up there with the Che shirts…. Quote
Jack Weber Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 I always wondered why Anonymous used the Guy Fawkes mask as a “figurehead”?………Kind of ironic and fitting all at once, that a guy that tried to interrupt Parliamentary proceedings, was caught, tried in the Star Chamber, then Drawn and Quartered, is their proverbial folk hero………Perhaps Reform CPC should re-examine their once proposed idea of bringing back the Death Penalty………. It’s up there with the Che shirts…. Riiigghhht... Because the backlash to this bill is being propogated by Communists... Because only freedom loving Canadians would want the government and the police to have unfettered access into our private lives... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Riiigghhht... Because the backlash to this bill is being propogated by Communists... Because only freedom loving Canadians would want the government and the police to have unfettered access into our private lives... Huh? My only parallel between Che and Fawkes is the commercialization of a past figure that ultimately failed in and died for his cause……..And is now trendy amongst the “kids these days”………..Now that Jesus fellow…. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Much of the positive reaction to this latest disclosure borders on the “end justifies the means” argument. The “end justifies the means” rationalization is a process that escalates a disagreement well beyond the original intent creating new “ends’ and more emphatic “means”. It is the wrong direction in which to go by any group. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Jack Weber Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Huh? My only parallel between Che and Fawkes is the commercialization of a past figure that ultimately failed in and died for his cause……..And is now trendy amongst the “kids these days”………..Now that Jesus fellow…. Sorry... I've been awaiting some of "The Booster Club" members justifications for accepting this bill... One of the more kooky one's I thought of was that they would blame Marxist revolutionaries for inciting reistnce to this bill... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Sorry... I've been awaiting some of "The Booster Club" members justifications for accepting this bill... One of the more kooky one's I thought of was that they would blame Marxist revolutionaries for inciting reistnce to this bill... Trust me, the party faithful {see us donators} aren’t too happy with this bill (or Toews) either……..We’ve only just got rid of the LGR…….As I said in one of the other threads on this topic, the Bill will be amended and Toews will be shuffled…….You heard it here first And it won’t be because of the NDP, Liberals, Anonymous or the comments on the CBC News website. Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) See most of us don't want this bill amended.. we want it SQUASHED as in it does not exist hence Anonymous And shuffled? big deal! hes still going to make money he does not deserve Edited February 26, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 See most of us don't want this bill amended.. we want it SQUASHED as in it does not exist hence Anonymous http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toiM1B6E2ww Unless of course you’re part of the fiscal base of the party. Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Posted February 26, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toiM1B6E2ww Unless of course you’re part of the fiscal base of the party. are you implying cpc is only governing for its partys supporters and ignoring the rest of Canada? cause I totally see that is whats happening Quote
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 are you implying cpc is only governing for its partys supporters and ignoring the rest of Canada? cause I totally see that is whats happening Not implying……I think that pretty much sums up all political parties……… Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Posted February 26, 2012 Not implying……I think that pretty much sums up all political parties……… Yes, except their is more left wingers than right wingers in Canada so you can see why theirs resentment towards right wing policies Quote
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Yes, except their is more left wingers than right wingers in Canada so you can see why theirs resentment towards right wing policies You’re wrong to categorise them as “Left vs. Right wingers”………This is evident by the numerous Left of center parties……..The Liberals aren’t all things to many NDP supporters, just as the NDP isn’t all things to Green supporters etc……..Most Canadians are centrists, in that they tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The key to success in Canadian politics is being able to find the middle ground between ones own supporters and the political center……As for the individual, the key is to find what party most identifies with your principles……….Even once there, you won’t get everything you want…… Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) If you claim the CPC are fiscally conservative I will laugh my ass off at you The majority of Canadians sure as hell dont agree with the omnibus crime bill and muzzling scientists.. copyright / surveillance bills.. Edited February 26, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 If you claim the CPC are fiscally conservative I will laugh my ass off at you The majority of Canadians sure as hell dont agree with the omnibus crime bill and muzzling scientists.. copyright / surveillance bills.. Wait till the budget and the coming cuts……..There is/will be a difference between a CPC Minority and Majority Government……..We don’t have to listen to what the other parties want now. As for the rest, well the Majority of Canadians then shouldn’t split their vote. We learned. Quote
Argus Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 A bill being put into law that would give the police sweeping powers to spy on every Canadian citizen,and one who would question it,is a self-entitlement type??? Certainly. "How dare you mess with my internet!? How dare you interfere with or question my personal enjoyment and web browsing!? I don't care about your reasons! I don't even want to know what your reasons are! They can't be as important as my personal enjoyment!!" Besides, as I've said before, if you think the government and all manner of other entities doesn't already have access to anything and everything you've done or do on the internet you're nuts. And all this bill would do is let cops have your IP and name. So? How is that going to hurt you? What is it you're posting that you think the cops would want to ask about your IP address and name for? And what do you think they'd do with that information given they still need a warrant to actually see anything about your web browsing or communications? If you're really worried about privacy you should be directing your efforts at Google, not Toews. They're a hell of a lot more of a danger to it than he and his bill. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
waldo Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Besides, as I've said before, if you think the government and all manner of other entities doesn't already have access to anything and everything you've done or do on the internet you're nuts. do tell, do tell Quote
Argus Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 No one has pointed out one thing this group has done which is wrong. And you're probably one of those who dismisses the Sun chain as "sleazy tabloid journalism". What did they do which was wrong? Gee, how about delving into someone's personal life in order to attack a government bill? You don't think that's wrong? You think everything about a politicians' personal life is fair game for the media? Does that include looking into the sexual exploits of say, Scott Brison? Do we want to know if he goes to gay clubs and what he does there? What about the past affairs of female MPs? Surely that's grist for our salivating gossip fodder? I mean, should we pay any attention to an MP who sleeps around, or who used to sleep around? He is the one that wants to extend the power of government and others to know information about people. To know their name and IP. That's about it without a warrant. So what? I mean, I don't actually think this bill is necessary, and so don't support it. But I don't think it's any big deal either, certainly not as much an invasion of privacy as Google is set to engage in. Ps the Liberals did it to thing is getting really old. You guys use to talk big game about be better then Liberals, now you talk big game about being the Liberals. Good job on that one. You don't think pointing out the two-faced hypocrisy of the Liberal party and its supporters is relevant? I do. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) do tell, do tell There's this little organization in Ottawa. They have a computer or two and can basically read anything you put onto the internet, or for that matter, onto your computer through any wireless device 24/7 if they so desire. CSEC Edited February 26, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 There's this little organization in Ottawa. They have a computer or two and can basically read anything you put onto the internet, or for that matter, onto your computer through any wireless device 24/7 if they so desire. CSEC And they have been for decades Quote
waldo Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 guys, guys... why the need then for Bill C-30? Quote
waldo Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 To know their name and IP. That's about it without a warrant. So what? spend some time and actually read the bill, read the analysis of the bill... the data points are much more than "just" email address and IP address - try, for example, IMEI that would allow cellphone users to be tracked. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 guys, guys... why the need then for Bill C-30? I've said as much in the other associated threads………I’ve only just taken my tin-foil hat off with the scrapping of the LGR. Quote
waldo Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 I've said as much in the other associated threads……… and yet, isn't your/Argus' reference to CSEC a bit misconstrued? Isn't CSEC, by law, prohibited from intercepting domestic communications? Just askin, just sayin. Perhaps you can throw up another catchy toon vid, hey? Quote
eyeball Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) I don't think much of criminal vigilantes threatening politicians in a democratic government. I can't say I think much of people who admire them either. I'd rather see an invasion of the state's secrecy than a politician's privacy but in lieu of the former I'll take anarchy over sycophancy any day of the week and twice on Sunday thanks. Edited February 26, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.