U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-10-2013, 12:51 PM
 
34,447 posts, read 41,558,091 times
Reputation: 29915

Advertisements

Amazes me that all of a sudden government spying on its citizens is a big news story, hate to break it to some of you but they've been doing it for many years probably generations. Do you really think this is something new thats only been happening since Obama took office?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2013, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
564 posts, read 879,272 times
Reputation: 984
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
Amazes me that all of a sudden government spying on its citizens is a big news story, hate to break it to some of you but they've been doing it for many years probably generations. Do you really think this is something new thats only been happening since Obama took office?
Agreed. Anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention is not shocked at all by this. Of course sites like Google and Facebook are going to be harvested by intelligence agencies.

Some interesting reading that is related:

ECHELON - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Room 641A - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 01:09 PM
 
18,333 posts, read 10,407,207 times
Reputation: 13393
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOkidd View Post
I'm very concerned by this news, as anyone who values their privacy should be.
Your concern is perhaps a little late to the game.

Things that record you movements and aren't privacy protected range from your old cel-phone through the new smart phones to your ISP address and computer IP address to something as bengin in thought as your older GM car with OnStar.

C'mon get real here. If we want to get outraged, we need to get outraged over stuff the governement does that is patently illegal but gets away with nonetheless such as McGuinty playing politics with a couple of gas plants then ordering the deletion of any e-mails discussing the deal. That cost you to the tune of over 500 million of your tax dollars. Arguably a more direct attack on your freedom than a machine data-mining cel and computer record trends.

If we were to hold their feet to the fire over the things we know they do badly we might just instill a sense of fear in them doing the stuff they DON'T tell us about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 01:15 PM
 
18,333 posts, read 10,407,207 times
Reputation: 13393
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthYorkEd View Post
Agreed. Anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention is not shocked at all by this. Of course sites like Google and Facebook are going to be harvested by intelligence agencies.

Some interesting reading that is related:

ECHELON - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Room 641A - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't buy into this false sense of outrage over the government playing footsie with Facebook or any other social networking site. Cripes the horror stories abound over obsessed ex-spouses or stalkers making life an absolute hell for their target by using those sites and stuff that people unthinkingly put on there. Do those proliferation of horror stories induce people to act with caution regarding social networking sites? NOPE; they line up like lemmings to divulge the most intimate secrets of their boring little lives for all and sundrie to read at will.

Some common sense is what's required in the things we "choose" to get outraged over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 03:49 PM
 
10,357 posts, read 7,993,124 times
Reputation: 4547
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
I don't buy into this false sense of outrage over the government playing footsie with Facebook or any other social networking site. Cripes the horror stories abound over obsessed ex-spouses or stalkers making life an absolute hell for their target by using those sites and stuff that people unthinkingly put on there. Do those proliferation of horror stories induce people to act with caution regarding social networking sites? NOPE; they line up like lemmings to divulge the most intimate secrets of their boring little lives for all and sundrie to read at will.

Some common sense is what's required in the things we "choose" to get outraged over.
I don't think it's as benign as that. Let's say someone has relatives in Syria, or Pakistan, whom he or she regularly e-mails. Let's say the person they e-mail is linked to an Al Queda member. In the articles I've seen, intelligence analysts are only allowed to go three degrees of separation in their hunt for terrorists, but who is to make them stick to that? Soon the Canadian finds themselves under special surveillance, and is soon on a list of people who are not allowed to enter the U.S.

Plus we're ALL going to have our travel across the U.S./ Canada border monitored in the next couple of years. A full exchange of information with the U.S. on Canadian citizens. The information is supposed to be limited, but who will control what is done with even that limited information? And since when does anything but a dictatorship monitor when people leave their own nation? Soon, we'll have to get exit visas just to leave Canada---just like Nazi Germany.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 05:24 PM
 
18,333 posts, read 10,407,207 times
Reputation: 13393
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
I don't think it's as benign as that. Let's say someone has relatives in Syria, or Pakistan, whom he or she regularly e-mails. Let's say the person they e-mail is linked to an Al Queda member. In the articles I've seen, intelligence analysts are only allowed to go three degrees of separation in their hunt for terrorists, but who is to make them stick to that? Soon the Canadian finds themselves under special surveillance, and is soon on a list of people who are not allowed to enter the U.S.

Plus we're ALL going to have our travel across the U.S./ Canada border monitored in the next couple of years. A full exchange of information with the U.S. on Canadian citizens. The information is supposed to be limited, but who will control what is done with even that limited information? And since when does anything but a dictatorship monitor when people leave their own nation? Soon, we'll have to get exit visas just to leave Canada---just like Nazi Germany.
While I might think your musings are slightly Orwellian; one cannot deny that information sharing has resulted in some real screw-ups in cases like Mahar Arar for one example.

We need to be vigilant and encourage our leadership to stand up for OUR rights vis-a-vis the U.S. insisting on as much access to our personal information as they deem necessary while using their market and our access to it as the bargaining chip.

Of late, our leadership seems more obsessed over maintaining anything but transparency in their dealings while opening the books on ours to whomever asks.

I am somewhat less than amused.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 06:52 PM
 
10,357 posts, read 7,993,124 times
Reputation: 4547
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
While I might think your musings are slightly Orwellian; one cannot deny that information sharing has resulted in some real screw-ups in cases like Mahar Arar for one example.

We need to be vigilant and encourage our leadership to stand up for OUR rights vis-a-vis the U.S. insisting on as much access to our personal information as they deem necessary while using their market and our access to it as the bargaining chip.

Of late, our leadership seems more obsessed over maintaining anything but transparency in their dealings while opening the books on ours to whomever asks.

I am somewhat less than amused.
Not to mention,Omar Khadr, a 15-year-old Canadian citizen, who in 2002 defended his village in Afghanistan from attacking Americans, and was then sent to Guantanamo, severely abused, and was finally sent to maximum security in Ontario, where to my knowledge he is still imprisoned. For doing what? defending his village against attack from marauding forces. Canada, ever the submissive to America's dominance.

Last Western Gitmo Detainee Transferred Out After 10 Years -- News from Antiwar.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2013, 01:30 AM
 
34,447 posts, read 41,558,091 times
Reputation: 29915
Ellmint your little Omar Kadr is an enemy combatant and hates everything about the west and would gladly terminate you and yours and do it with a smile on his face.the fact that he has a Canadian passport is meaningless in this case. he's the enemy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2013, 03:20 AM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,087 posts, read 12,033,285 times
Reputation: 9717
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
Not to mention,Omar Khadr, a 15-year-old Canadian citizen, who in 2002 defended his village in Afghanistan from attacking Americans, and was then sent to Guantanamo, severely abused, and was finally sent to maximum security in Ontario, where to my knowledge he is still imprisoned. For doing what? defending his village against attack from marauding forces. Canada, ever the submissive to America's dominance.

Last Western Gitmo Detainee Transferred Out After 10 Years -- News from Antiwar.com
Oh, hon, don't go there. That "Canadian of Convenience" family comes straight from the proverbial bowels of hell.
It's not a question of an innocent child getting caught defending his village.
That entire family can rot, as far as I'm concerned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2013, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Oakville, ON
377 posts, read 1,517,341 times
Reputation: 428
The lack of transparency about it does bother me, but I need more information about this before I can form a proper judgment. Questions I need answered:

1. To what degree is my personal information available? Can they just see who I call, and who I communicate with - or do they have access to what was said?

2. Would information like this be admissible in court?

I have nothing to hide, and I've already accepted the fact that the majority of our communication in today's world are not private. Emails, Facebook, texting, online banking, debit/credit cards, etc. all carry a degree of risk of accidental or unauthorized use. If I want to have a conversation with somebody that's 100% private, that conversation should be had face to face in a private setting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top