Vic Toews, the Canadian Tory MP pushing for the new spying bill says that people who oppose him are "standing with child pornographers." Mr Toews's bill will require ISPs to record all your online activity and give police access to those logs without a warrant. Ontario police recently busted a huge child-porn ring without needing any further spying power. In fact, no one can find any police investigation that has failed for lack of snooping powers. A leaked memo from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police shows that Canada's law enforcement has been scouring its records for evidence supporting the need for this bill, without luck. (Thanks, Wild Rumpus!)

34 Responses to “Canadian MP: if you oppose warrantless snooping, you "stand with child pornographers"”

  1. Child pornographers are the new ‘red menace’.  

    …actually, they’re getting a bit stale as a threat now.  I wonder what it will be next?

  2. Guest says:

    If you’ve got nothing to hide, let me go through your house and take pictures of everything. 

    • Wreckrob8 says:

      The British press use that line in their snooping and phone tapping, too. Hey, we might catch paedophiles. How could upstanding citizens object?

  3. Jayle Enn says:

    After stunts like dissolving Parliament to avoid legal inquiries into party activities, a rickety old bastard invoking the mother of all fallacious arguments barely registers for me. Unfortunately there is a statistically significant number of people who will swallow that hook, line and sinker.

    • Funk Daddy says:

      Excerpt of an email:

      What irritated me quite a bit is that the proposed bill, although wide ranging, is being sold almost exclusively by the Conservatives as being necessary to “bring into line with 
      the 21st century” the manner in which ISP’s must comply with police investigation into that most heinous crime, specifically. 

      What irritates me the most is that no one rebutting said argument on the CBC or from what I see on major media websites has mentioned that there is a recent federal law on 
      the books & in force that can and I believe was intended to be interpreted to compel complete ISP cooperation, even without judiciary instruction or active police 
      investigation, any incident that can prospectively be said to indicate the use of the ISP service to communicate or commit said crime in any format on that system. 

      Presumably if it is police that provide such indication to an ISP then an investigation is underway, but the law seems to me clearly muddied to allow broad interpretation. It 
      requires all of those things the Conservatives claim the bill tabled is for (retention of evidence at ISP level etc), but the law is limited to that type of offense.

      Only thing I can guess at is that being so specific, it curtails abuse due to the risk involved and is of limited use (as it should be). Although there is no requirement to alert the 
      target subject after an investigation or any notification to target subject disclosing the release of information to police/govt. at any time, if it were ever shown to be used to 
      acquire info illegally or inappropriately it would be tantamount to accusing the target subject of the worst possible crime, and with a record of having done so in the hands of 
      a private entity (the ISP). Result, worst possible optics, the kind that bring down govs and lose majorities. Thus the need to expand the power to any crime, specifically, 
      mundane crimes that public figures are frequently investigated for/about.

      http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/I-20.7.pdf
      End Excerpt–

      According to this law, Minister Toew’s and police already have the power to compel anything at all of an ISP in relation to an investigation, even before an investigation is opened, and without any warrant at any time unless charges are laid, then all information collected prior to or during an investigation is under warrant retroactively.

      The public declarations of the rationale behind the current bill are completely and utterly false and it can be demonstrated. Anything can trigger this law and an ISP must comply.

      An ISP that fought to protect privacy would be publicly labelled as complicit with child porn activity and probably lose every customer they ever had. Add to that the steep financial incentives (fines) to cooperate and none could resist, to top it off individuals that can be determined to have failed to comply can see jail time.

      Why does no one care about this obvious contradiction, I see it nowhere, that email was to an opposition MP who I hope responds.

  4. user1234567 says:

    If  child pornographers have a better position than government officials I think that says more about the government officials than anything else…

  5. blearghhh says:

    Crossposting my comment from ArsTechnica (Is that allowed? Hopefully):

    It’s interesting. The backlash from that statement seems to be strong enough that not only would I not be surprised that Toews has to formally retract it, but it could conceivably derail the whole bill.Then again, that could be a combination of my own viewpoint’s echo chamber and wishful thinking on my part.But the condemnation has come fast and fierce and from all political stripes, and has definitely galvanized the opposition. Very bad move on Vic’s part whatever the outcome. 

  6. Jeffrey Chadwell says:

    So…I guess if you favor warrantless snooping, you stand with voyeurs and Peeping Toms?

  7. Tribune says:

    I paid cash for my coffee (well i know it was not in an airport but it is under a mile away from one and it is in Canada, actually no matter i believe the heritage minister called us terrorists for opposing c-32) and I oppose this bill.

    I would never have known I was a terrorist child pron supporter if  these officials had not told me.

  8. here’s his contact info: 

    http://www.victoews.com/default.asp?ID=8 

    Tell him what you think.  

  9. EH says:

    Mr. Vic might be asked why he’s trying to throw the scent off of the true sources of child porn. Does he have an interest in spreading confusion and protecting the real child pornographers?

  10. Snat says:

    I wonder if Vic Toews would have any issues if we look into everything he owns – he got nothing to hide right?

  11. SedanChair says:

    So, I oppose warrantless snooping, I’m on the record against SOPA/PIPA/ACTA/POO-POO-PEE-PEE, and I’ve been known to pay for my coffee with a five-dollar bill.

    Could somebody please put me in touch with Ramsey Clark? For I have the feeling I’ll be in need of his services soon enough…

  12.  We can do that, too: Vic Toews, the Canadian Tory MP, stands with Stalin in wishing to take away people’s rights to privacy. 

    See, that was easy. Wrong, but easy.

    • Tribune says:

      Oh lets try that some more

      Keep the gun registry, you are either with us or with the Muderers. (for those not following Canadian politics there is a gun registry they are currently attempting to dismantle.)

      Hey this is fun – also wrong. Is it possible that issues are more complicated that you are with us or against us. Someone should tell the Conservatives (current party in power).

    • TimRowledge says:

      Oh, it can be worse;
      If you support warrantless snooping you stand with….. Conservatives!
      Now how’s that for scary?

    • niktemadur says:

      Keeping it contemporary:  If you support warrantless snooping, you stand with Iran and North Korea!

      Wrong but easy is one way of looking at it, but one could look at it from another angle and say it’s taking a mediocre politician’s inflated words, and sticking them up his ass with his own ‘hot button’ buzzwords.

      But yeah, I had the same thought as you did while reading the synopsis and scrolled down, bumped into your comment.

  13. ChanceSchism says:

    Frohike forgot to gas up the van again. We’ll get there.

    (see three posts up, or this sounds silly. Off to learn how to reply)

  14. Wild Rumpus says:

    Michael Geist has a list of quotes from Toews who seems to have a real passion for fear mongering using child pornography…

    http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6322/125/

  15. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    They talk a whole bunch about child porn… I think it is high time they have their computers searched for their “research” materials.

    It really should be a law that the law goes into effect for a year, but only on politicians.  That way they can see first hand issues resulting from their stupidity, and experience the joy of having to sleep in the bed they made.  I think the browsing history of this gentleman will shed amazing light onto what makes him tick, and hopefully embarrass him right out of office.

    The ones screaming the loudest, are often the ones trying to keep anyone from looking at them.

    • Funk Daddy says:

      The current law compelling ISP cooperation is stronger than the tabled bill and requires anything the police or govt want from an ISP, but ONLY in relation to child porn.

      This bill is about expanding those powers in a somewhat limited format (comparably) to any crime at all. So that ISP’s will provide information carte blanche without raising flags (Why are all our political bloggers involved in Child Porn?)

  16. Shinkuhadoken says:

    Apparently, the plan was to repeal the Long Gun Registry, and while their Alberta base was too busy masturbating to their newly freed firearms to notice, slip the spying bill under the radar.

    All Toews had to do was keep his mouth closed, but he couldn’t help calling every freedom-loving Canadian supporters of child pornography along the way. He probably wishes everyone would just shut up and get into his newly constructed jails, already.

  17. atimoshenko says:

    How about, in return, giving every Canadian citizen the right to warrantlessly investigate the full Internet history of Mr Toews? The only reason for him to object is if he is trying to hide that he is a child pornographer.

  18. Daniel Grover says:

    Turns out that if you oppose the product of Soylent Green, you also stand with child pornographers! Switch sides now, while it still looks sincere!

Leave a Reply