jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) jacee, on 22 Feb 2015 - 10:35 PM, said: There may be some in crowds of thousands who aren't entirely peaceful. Are we all to be punished for that? That's what happens now.It did happen. Collective punishment shouldn't happen. It will happen more under C51. Without accountability, oversight or legal recourse. Dissent is criminalized. . Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
eyeball Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Quick google for you. Which is overriding, C-51, or the Constitution Act, 1982? The right to peaceful assembly is constitutionally protected. Just not protected enough. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Quick google for you. Which is overriding, C-51, or the Constitution Act, 1982? The right to peaceful assembly is constitutionally protected. You are right, it is protected under the constitution, which is why this bill must either fail totally or at least be amended to change the language to match the constitution. Peaceful instead of Lawful. Again. a load of taxpayer bucks will be spent as the SCC sorts out Harpers latest mess. Quote
jbg Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 It would appear that a great many people are supporting this current initiative by the government to help keep us safe from terror. A new law is needed and most people, it would seem don't mind giving the police expanded powers to keep us safe. I'd rather take Justin's approach and try to find the "inner child" of the terrorists. Surely they must have some kernel of decency buried in their brain. Even the ISIS fighters must have suffered abuse as a child, or been angered by Zionism, when they burn people alive. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) former-justices-pms-express-concern-over-lack-of-anti-terror-oversight- The Supreme Court Justices can't speak publicly, but retired ones can. Retired PM's too. Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
eyeball Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 I'd rather take Justin's approach and try to find the "inner child" of the terrorists. Surely they must have some kernel of decency buried in their brain. Even the ISIS fighters must have suffered abuse as a child, or been angered by Zionism, when they burn people alive. Justin's approach is to not appear soft...good look with that. He's proving to be just as soft on root causes and blow back as virtually every other western politician. I'm betting he's looking at that dictator's tool kit and thinking "I want some of that". Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Mulcair's on board for some too. I wonder if Harper ever intends to give that power over to either one of them. Mass surveillance, disruption and enforcement are in place. Dissent is crushed. Elections are rigged. Forever Harper? . Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Mulcair's on board for some too. I wonder if Harper ever intends to give that power over to either one of them. Mass surveillance, disruption and enforcement are in place. Dissent is crushed. Elections are rigged. Forever Harper? . Harper aint giving oe inch of power to nobody. He writes a law that smacks right in the face of the constitution and the hasnt the grace, or guts, to even show up in the house to even debate it. Only to invoke closure. Stinks to the high heavens. Quote
Moonbox Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Harper aint giving oe inch of power to nobody. He writes a law that smacks right in the face of the constitution and the hasnt the grace, or guts, to even show up in the house to even debate it. Only to invoke closure. Stinks to the high heavens. Probably eats babies too, right? Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
eyeball Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Probably eats babies too, right? No he just drops bombs on them. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
LemonPureLeaf Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 It would seem to me that Jacee, your position is that with this new proposed legislation that Canada will be transformed into a kind of V for Vendetta country. To me that is quite an alarmist stance and quite impossible. I dont think we gave to worry about G men everywhere just yet. The Charter and Constitution are still entact, so we have little to fear. I would urge everyone to not be so afraid moving forward. No need to fear our government, not even one run by Stephen Harper. Quote
Mighty AC Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 It would seem to me that Jacee, your position is that with this new proposed legislation that Canada will be transformed into a kind of V for Vendetta country. To me that is quite an alarmist stance and quite impossible. I dont think we gave to worry about G men everywhere just yet. The Charter and Constitution are still entact, so we have little to fear. I would urge everyone to not be so afraid moving forward. No need to fear our government, not even one run by Stephen Harper. Do you believe the state should be able to spy on our communications, without warrant, share that information with foreign nations and all without any oversight? Do you trust that this, or any, government would only use nearly unlimited spy powers for good or do you think that maybe there should be a group, separate from those in power, to monitor their behaviour? Quote "Our lives begin to end the day we stay silent about the things that matter." - Martin Luther King Jr"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
LemonPureLeaf Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) Do you believe the state should be able to spy on our communications, without warrant, share that information with foreign nations and all without any oversight? Do you trust that this, or any, government would only use nearly unlimited spy powers for good or do you think that maybe there should be a group, separate from those in power, to monitor their behaviour? This is already happening. Every email you write and receive using hotmail, yahoo, gmail plus many more are saved and stored in case they need them at a later date. So what you fear most is already occuring. the only people who have something to fear are those who have something to hide. Edited February 23, 2015 by LemonPureLeaf Quote
eyeball Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 The Charter and Constitution are still entact, so we have little to fear. I would urge everyone to not be so afraid moving forward. No need to fear our government, not even one run by Stephen Harper. What about future PM's fuelled by more galvanizing events and fear? We may only have a little to fear now, but I think everyone can still recall when we had virtually nothing to fear. So given our government's reaction to a little fear what do you think the result will be when there's a lot? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 This is already happening. Every email you write and receive using hotmail, yahoo, gmail plus many more are saved and stored in case they need them at a later date. So what you fear most is already occuring. the only people who have something to fear are those who have something to hide. Havent we heard that old saw a million times before! Quote
Mighty AC Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 This is already happening. Every email you write and receive using hotmail, yahoo, gmail plus many more are saved and stored in case they need them at a later date. There is a difference between Google holding on to deleted items for 180 days or being requested by officials, WITH A WARRANT, to turn over such communications and unwarranted spying. Google also doesn't have the power to put me on a watch or no fly list. So what you fear most is already occuring. the only people who have something to fear are those who have something to hide. Spoken like Big Brother himself. You are advocating for a bill that grants the state the ability of spy on you, without any checks or balances. Even if you believe that citizens do not deserve any privacy, wouldn't you want those with absolute power over you to be kept in check? I find it odd that the same conservatives that spew phrases like 'freedom' and 'less government intrusion' are now in favour of such state powers. Quote "Our lives begin to end the day we stay silent about the things that matter." - Martin Luther King Jr"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
cybercoma Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 History is in the past.Wrong. History is being made every day. Quote
Black Dog Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 This is already happening. Every email you write and receive using hotmail, yahoo, gmail plus many more are saved and stored in case they need them at a later date. So what you fear most is already occuring. the only people who have something to fear are those who have something to hide. And yet when it comes to the mandatory long form census, privacy concerns trump anything else. Why the double standard from the Conservatives? Quote
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 the only people who have something to fear are those who have something to hide. The only people who have something to fear are the people on Harper's infamous ' enemy list' ... and innocent people who may get scooped up with them. . Quote
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) There is a difference between Google holding on to deleted items for 180 days or being requested by officials, WITH A WARRANT, to turn over such communications and unwarranted spying. Google also doesn't have the power to put me on a watch or no fly list. Spoken like Big Brother himself. You are advocating for a bill that grants the state the ability of spy on you, without any checks or balances. Even if you believe that citizens do not deserve any privacy, wouldn't you want those with absolute power over you to be kept in check? I find it odd that the same conservatives that spew phrases like 'freedom' and 'less government intrusion' are now in favour of such state powers. They think it can never happen to themselves.However, from media accounts it appears that Harper doesn't have any 'friends' anymore, at least none with ability to disagree with him in any way. Even his own backbenchers are on the enemies list. As he becomes more and more paranoid and desperate to hold onto power, everybody is at risk from those intrusive powers. . Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
Keepitsimple Posted February 23, 2015 Author Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) They think it can never happen to themselves. However, from media accounts it appears that Harper doesn't have any 'friends' anymore, at least none with ability to disagree with him in any way. Even his own backbenchers are on the enemies list. As he becomes more and more paranoid and desperate to hold onto power, everybody is at risk from those intrusive powers. . Wow - I hadn't heard that - poor man......but perhaps you haven't heard? He "Gets by with a little help from his friends". Edited February 23, 2015 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 They think it can never happen to themselves. However, from media accounts it appears that Harper doesn't have any 'friends' anymore, at least none with ability to disagree with him in any way. Even his own backbenchers are on the enemies list. As he becomes more and more paranoid and desperate to hold onto power, everybody is at risk from those intrusive powers. . Perhaps why we have seen some rats leaving the sinking ship of late. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 No friends ? So sad....maybe he can go snort coke with the Rolling Stones in New York City when this is all over. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 No friends ? So sad....maybe he can go snort coke with the Rolling Stones in New York City when this is all over. What, no CBC comments today. Quote
Argus Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Walking on a road/street is always unlawful ... civil disobedience is unlawful by nature. We don't need no stinkin' permits. . Most protests of any size arrange their location and routes in advance with the authorities. They are therefore quite lawful, whether they block streets or not - so long as they've been given permission. 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
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.