| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
NEW! Canadian anti-terror law, more Data sharing, more tracking, increased Police funding
A couple days ago I shared an article, which was discussing the leaked documents from Snowden and how in them, a new program called “Levitation”, allows CSE to track millions of downloads daily. This would also include all the usual social sites one can think of; Youtube, Twitter, Facebook and the many likes of them, also sites like this as well. Levitation is highly developed and can sift millions of videos and articles daily.
“Every single thing that you do — in this case uploading/downloading files to these sites — that act is being archived, collected and analyzed,” says Ron Deibert, director of the University of Toronto-based internet security think-tank Citizen Lab, who reviewed the document.
“It’s really the first time that a story has been reported that involves [CSE] as the lead agency in a program of pure mass surveillance,” said Glenn Greenwald, a constitutional lawyer and journalist with The Intercept
In the latest attack on free speech, particularly focusing on this Internet crackdown that is taking place; a new anti-terror bill could be yet another stepping stone for them to move closer to complete access into all of our digital lives and a complete control over the internet.
This is happening in Canada right now, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said last weekend that new anti-terror legislation to be introduced on Friday will, among other things, “criminalize the promotion of terrorism.” However a legal expert on the matter had a different view saying: “‘It’s really more political posturing than sound counterterrorism policy.”
Such a move, however, could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression in Canada and would not necessarily contribute to effectively fighting domestic extremism, according to legal experts.
The new bill, which could also include provisions for expanded police powers, was promised by the federal government in the weeks following the October attacks in Quebec and Ottawa that left two members of the Canadian Forces dead.
Isn’t it strange that after any attack such as the Quebec and Ottawa attacks, Paris attacks, Boston marathon bombings, 9/11, Sandy Hook, among the many others you know; the governments quickly try to rally and increase police force, which by the way, the western police forces have become extremely well-funded and trained, and even the most basic cop when suited up could pass for a good paramilitary, let alone the elite forces in the police departments.
Also you start seeing tighter internet restrictions and new laws passed, along with the government making secret deals with Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook and even more… and they are pushing again in Canada after the Ottawa attacks.
Justice Minister Peter MacKay suggested that the measures would, among a host of other consequences, allow authorities to target materials that may be contributing to the radicalization of Canadians, particularly online.
The new bill, however, is largely a knee-jerk response to October’s attacks and Canada already has the necessary laws on the books to pursue and prosecute people promoting hatred or inciting violence, says Kent Roach, a professor at the University of Toronto who specializes in constitutional and terrorism law.
“The government has the burden before they introduce new laws to demonstrate why it’s not possible to prosecute these kinds of offences under existing Canadian law,” he says.
“There’s a real danger when we make laws in reaction to events with the assumption that those laws will help prevent tragedies from happening again.”
Government officials have repeatedly stated that any new legislation would be drafted in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and will not infringe on freedom of expression and religion.
Similar legislation criminalizing the “glorification” of terrorist acts exists in several European countries, and MacKay said last year that the government was reviewing specific laws in the U.K. as a possible template.
Earlier this month, Roach co-authored a working paper with Craig Forcese, an associate professor of law at the University of Ottawa, that analyzed the prospect of a Canadian law targeting glorification of terrorism offences.
‘Sometimes these things can become wins for extremists and terrorists. They are trying to provoke further attacks and if the response reinforces their perspective on the state of the world, then it ends up helping their cause.’- Scott Stewart, VP of tactical analysis at Stratfor
Pushing the limits on what kinds of speech are considered criminal may put a “chill” on the dialogue around terrorism, they wrote, particularly in communities where discussing the issues around radicalization and extremism is most critical.
“There are at least two concerns about speech chill: will people not talk about controversial topics because they’re worried about being charged under a new offence? And second, will it drive potentially radicalized individuals further underground?” says Roach.
When people don’t feel free to talk about the political, religious and ideological elements of extremism, Canadian society won’t be able to address the underlying forces that drive people toward radicalization and, in some cases, to acts of violence, says University of Waterloo sociology and legal studies professor Lorne Dawson.
We all know that we have been monitored for a very long time, through the things we share online, through the phones, through many aspects that people do not even think about. Many believe there is nothing we can do about that, many may stop sharing important information due to this, many may continue and end up arrested for years for domestic terrorism… the question is, how far will this go? Is there really such a thing as Freedom of Speech?
Well, I guess some would say, yes… because you are typing this right now. Well, I can buy that, for now….
