What is Digg?22 Comments
- greg88, on 08/10/2008, -0/+3here are a few links to videos from youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV5udSWJcZo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbw_K8pfNfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjsdlBk6PUY - travis1982, on 08/11/2008, -1/+2Wikipedia vs. Legislation. Here is what the law says:
ww2.ps-sp.gc.ca/Publications/Policing/Surveillance99Rev_e.pdf - travis1982, on 08/11/2008, -1/+2So, what you're saying is that, it was a terrorist attack...and was due to Canada having "non-existent" wire tap restrictions. That doesn't make sense. I'm not sure where you heard that Canada has a relaxed wiretap policy, it's actually about the same as the US. Warrents for wiretaps, video surveillance etc has to be approved by a judge/Solicitor General or the Deputy Solicitor General, and it's quite a lengthy process. It's adorable that you like to think you know something about the Canadian legal system and legislation though.
- inactive, on 08/11/2008, -1/+2Warrentless Wiretapping Comes to Canada-Canadian Media Censored -- http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Warrentless_Wiretapping_ ...
- travis1982, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1So, what you're saying is that, it was a terrorist attack...and was due to Canada having "non-existent" wire tap restrictions. That doesn't make sense. I'm not sure where you heard that Canada has relaxed wiretap policy, it's actually about the same as the US. Warrents for wiretaps, video surveillance etc has to be approved by a judge/Solicitor General or the Deputy Solicitor General, and it's quite a lengthy process.
- inactive, on 08/11/2008, -1/+2Probably a terrorist attack. Canada is a softer target than he US. They do not have guarantees against wiretaps in the same way that US citizens have and so often agonize over, but they have a huge middle eastern population with terrorist sleeper cells who act autonomously.
- inactive, on 08/12/2008, -1/+1You idiot! That document is 9 years OLD and pre 911. Figures - do you have a BA in GOOGLE SEARCH?!
- inactive, on 08/12/2008, -1/+1Interception in Exceptional Circumstances
A peace officer may intercept private communications in exceptional circumstances when he or she believes, on reasonable grounds, that an authorization could not be obtained under any provision of this Part due to the urgency of the situation. Furthermore, the peace officer must believe on reasonable grounds that such an interception is immediately necessary to prevent an unlawful act that would cause serious harm to any person or to property. In addition, the originator of the private communications or the person intended by the originator to receive it is the person who would cause the harm or be the victim or intended victim of this harmful act (section 184.4 C.C
It is up to the individual officer and NOT the court to decide when the wiretap will be established. There IS no constitutional guarantee like in the US and there is NO FISA like in the US. Just like I said before and this is from your own source. I guess the Law is another one of your intellectual weaknesses. - travis1982, on 08/12/2008, -1/+1Doesn't matter retard, the surveillance policy is still the same, check it out:
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/le/gapo_psep-1-e ...
Next time you want to criticize a someone's source...don't start off by referencing WIKILEAKS. MORON. - diggcastro, on 08/16/2008, -0/+0Yet, reports show...
http://www.northpeel.com/news/article/54626
http://www.mytelus.com/ncp_news/article.en.do?pn=r ...
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=568572272&h ... - travis1982, on 08/12/2008, -1/+1Did you even read your own comment? Hints the title: Interception in Exceptional Circumstances. So that means if the RCMP officer presumes that there will be an immediate and direct threat that cannot wait for the lengthy process of going through the legal process directly, they can acquire a temporary license for invasion of privacy. Pretty much what I said before Captrick, I know the US has the same thing for extreme circumstances. When and if an officer acquires this license, it's usually for organized crime, such as hells angels, or is related to terrorism. AND, if when the Attorney General reviews the licenses and circumstances surrounding them, and finds them unsatisfactory, then the officer has to explain his case...if it is found that the officer required a license without proper cause, he cant be charged. I do know the law, it appears that you don't however. You can't just pick and choose what you would like to believe about it Captrick. You actually have to be educated in the matter to get an idea of Canadian jurisprudence, you're just a guy with Google and Wikipedia.
- Gooserbaijan, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1He's got the book 'The World According to George Bush'. It helps him see the world through Bush's beady little eyes!
- inactive, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1That's not even a link moron Travis you moron. In addition, surveillance of foreign nationals to prevent terrorism is not even covered by domestic policing legislation. In the US police need a warrant first in order to wiretap. Intelligence agencies do not need one in advance - they can get it later. That's is what FISA is all about. Do you know what the F stands for????? FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act. Canada has no FISA!!!!!!
I have to go watch the Olympics, the Americans just won another Gold Medal. - travis1982, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1"That's not even a link moron Travis you moron." Now that was amazing grammar! pft. First of all, it is a link...MORON...copy and paste in into your web browser. Secondly, Canada needs a warrant for surveillance for criminals, which as to be processed through the legal system first. If Canada, CSIS, is investigation a suspected terrorist on Canadian soil, they can obtain a warrant in one of 2 ways, first is to go through the process of the legal system, getting approval by the Attorney General. Second, if the matter is urgent enough that it can not wait for immediate approval, the process will be cut in half, time wise, AND will be reviewed at the end of the year personally by the Attorney General. So, it may seem different to you, because you can not comprehend basic legislation, but Canada has it's policies when it comes to surveillance, so shut your ***** mouth you retard.
- diggcastro, on 08/16/2008, -0/+0Check the Brampton Guardian's newspaper from yesterday. The person that died in the explosion, had only been in the country for six months lived in Brampton, came from India/Pakistan, no family, no relatives - and goes directly to work in a place like this. Sounds like a terrorist cell to me!
- travis1982, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Umm..Captrick, you referenced TWO incidents over 30 years ago, as well as referencing Quebec, which might as well be a different country. How many sources do you think I can find on the American government spying on their citizens unlawfully? I like how you believe in conspiracies that suite your beliefs and disprove conspiracies that disprove it. it's funny.
- inactive, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Communications Security Establishment Canada : There has been some criticism over the years of the CSE. A former employee of the organization, Mike Frost, claimed in a 1994 book, Spyworld, that the agency eavesdropped on Margaret Trudeau to find out if she smoked marijuana and that the CSE monitored two of former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher's dissenting cabinet ministers in London on behalf of the UK's secret service.
In 2006, CTV Montreal’s program On Your Side, conducted a three-part documentary on the CSE naming it “Canada’s most secretive spy agency” and that “this ultra-secret agency has now become very powerful”, conducting unlawful surveillance by monitoring phone calls, e-mails, chat groups, radio, microwave, and satellite.
In 2007, former Ontario lieutenant-governor, James Bartleman, testified at the Air India Inquiry on May 3 that he saw a CSE communications intercept warning of the June 22, 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182 before it occurred.
Like I said, Canadians are being monitored and they can do nothing about it - inactive, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Well if you have credible evidence of the American Government spying on US citizens illegally I would be happy to entertain those myths. Two of the KNOWN cases of domestic spying on Canadians was in the last two years. Not 30 years ago. It is the intelligence gathering and sigint that you don't know about that is the problem....not what has been exposed by self disclosing former employers of CSE and a political leader defending himself.
- travis1982, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Please provide references/evidence of illegal domestic spying on Canadians.
- travis1982, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Jesus Christ, who the conspiracy nut now! Why would the terrorists blow up a propane facility isolated from residential and government buildings? ONE person died, from a ***** heart attack and no buildings of significance were destroyed. The thing you don't get about the Canadian legal system, is that it is designed to be vague in certain areas, the fact is, is that the Canadian government really can't and doesn't wiretap without cause, and if an agency DOES wiretap without a reasonable cause, then there are repercussions. That's it, I can't explain it to you any other way to make you understand, you just don't want to believe it. There was a suspected terrorists living 3 blocks away from me about a year ago, CSIS first got a approval from the Governor General to wiretap and put surveillance on the suspects house, a week later, when CSIS found out this kid had connections to a terrorist organization, they arrested him...and found 26 pipebombs in his basement. When it comes to criminals, same thing..the RCMP gets approval from the Attorney General to put a wiretap on a suspects house. If the matter is urgent, a formal warrant is not required immediately, but APPROVAL from the Attorney/Governor General is MANDATORY. Police agencies don't have the power that you're suggesting. You're right, we don't have FISA. probably because we have a very different government and legal system.
- diggcastro, on 08/16/2008, -0/+0Check the Brampton Guardian's newspaper from yesterday. The person that died in the explosion, had only been in the country for six months, from India, no family, no relatives - and goes directly to work in a place like this. Sounds like a terrorist cell to me!
- inactive, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1Interception of signal intelligence has nothing to do with domestic wiretapping Travis. The point is that you will never know, in Canada, whether or not your Government is listening to your conversations with your terrorist wannabe buddies in a foreign country. There is no Canadian law against that. That is actually a good thing. It is just so Hypocritically Canadian to criticize the US for passing a law, that at least temporarily, allows the Government intelligence agencies to listen to US citizens conversations with foreign terrorists, without FIRST getting a warrant as was previously required by the FISA act. Canada HAS nothing like the FISA act and therefore do not enjoy the same liberties as Americans in terms of signal intelligence. THAT is why the propane explosion was probably a terrorist act by an independent cell of Hamas or Al-Queda who do not need guidance or permission from foreign sources, they just act on their own on behalf of their ideological heroes.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is