Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Paging Pierre Poutine in Thunder Bay!"
Good Day Readers:
Know what was worse than a robocall? A voice mail message from "The Duffinator!" God it was awful listening to his bilingual fractured French extolling the virtues of Shelly "Scott Brison called me stupid!" Glover prior to the last election. Any thought we might have had of voting for her immediately dissipated after that.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Cool water!
Charge your iPhone With Water
MFC has built a portable fuel cell called Powertrekk, which recharges a smartphone with just water. MFC's Chief Executive Bjoern Westerholm shows WSJ how he $225 charger works.
"But, but Your Lordship please don't shoot me ....."
North Georgia judge investigated for brandishing fun in court
County Superior Court Judge David E. Barrett pulled out his pistol Wednesday not in anger, but out of frustration and to make "a poor rhetorical point," District Attorney Jeff Langley said Saturday. Langley, who was in the courtroom when it happened, said the Judicial Qualifications Commission has launched an investigation of the judge.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
A North Georgia judge is being investigated for
pulling out a handgun during a hearing this week as a woman testified about
being an assault victim.
Judge David E. Barrett |
County Superior Court Judge David E. Barrett pulled out his pistol Wednesday not in anger, but out of frustration and to make "a poor rhetorical point," District Attorney Jeff Langley said Saturday. Langley, who was in the courtroom when it happened, said the Judicial Qualifications Commission has launched an investigation of the judge.
"It was totally inappropriate conduct for a
courtroom," Langley said. The district attorney said that he approached the
bench after Barrett pulled out his gun and told the judge to put his pistol
away. The judge did so and the hearing continued, Langley said.
Barrett, chief judge of the Enotah Judicial Circuit,
did not immediately respond to emails or to phone calls left at his office
Saturday. Under Georgia law, judges are allowed to carry a concealed weapon on
the bench, but it is a crime to point a pistol at another person when there is
no justification to do so.
Jeff Davis, director of the Judicial Qualifications
Commission, said Saturday he could neither confirm nor deny whether the judicial
watchdog agency was investigating Barrett.
The bizarre conduct occurred Wednesday during a bond
hearing and a request for a temporary protective order against Scott Sugarman, a
former Hall County sheriff's deputy who was recently arrested on a number of
charges, including rape and aggravated assault with a handgun. Sugarman has
pleaded not guilty.
The woman who filed the charges against Sugarman was
on the witness stand and had testified Sugarman had abused her and, on one
occasion, had put a gun to her head. During the latter part of her testimony,
the woman was not being cooperative, Langley said.
Barrett told the woman she was "killing her case"
and pulled out his gun and, feigning to offer it to her, said, "You might as
well shoot your lawyer," Langley said.
At that point, Langley said, he approached the bench
and told the judge to put the gun away.
The woman's lawyer, Andrea Conarro of Dahlonega, on
Saturday described the scene, as Barrett swept the pistol across the
courtroom, "as one of those slow motion kind of events."
"Later, as it sunk in, I was upset, and I felt like
a tragedy had been created," she said, adding that by "tragedy" she meant what
could happen to Barrett because of what he did.
Both Conarro and Langley said the woman, whose name
is being withheld because The Atlanta Journal-Constitution does not disclose the
names of victims of alleged sexual assault, did not appear to be
traumatized.
"My client thought it was a test, that he was trying
to see how she would respond, like it was a credibility determination," Conarro
said.
Said Langley, "When it happened, I objected and
sought to take control of the situation and terminate that conduct
immediately."
Steven Chase and Daniel Leblanc
Ottawa and Edmonton
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
A political operative hiding behind the alias “Pierre Poutine” engineered an
off-the-books scheme using robo-calls and a disposable cellphone to discourage
opposition voters from casting ballots in an Ontario riding last May, Elections
Canada alleges.
(Did you receive an election-day robo-call? We want to hear from you.)
More related to this story
Documents retrieved from an Edmonton court for the first time describe in detail exactly how Canada’s elections watchdog believes someone linked to the Conservative campaign in Guelph, Ontario tried to suppress the vote for rival candidates on May 2, 2011. This comes as opposition parties accuse the Tories of election misdeeds across a broader array of ridings – about 30 throughout the country.
(Did you receive an election-day robo-call? We want to hear from you.)
More related to this story
Documents retrieved from an Edmonton court for the first time describe in detail exactly how Canada’s elections watchdog believes someone linked to the Conservative campaign in Guelph, Ontario tried to suppress the vote for rival candidates on May 2, 2011. This comes as opposition parties accuse the Tories of election misdeeds across a broader array of ridings – about 30 throughout the country.
The allegations laid out by Elections Canada paint a picture of a sophisticated dirty tricks campaign, one that is likely to damage the governing Conservatives despite their insistence that any wrongdoing was the work of a rogue political aide.
Former chief electoral officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley said he has never encountered a vote suppression scheme on the scale of the one alleged in Guelph.
“Absolutely not, I can say that honestly,” he said in an interview. “This is the first I hear of something of this scope.”
Late Tuesday, Michael Sona, the former Conservative staffer linked to the controversy, broke his silence to protest his innocence and say he hoped the “real guilty party” would be found.
Elections Canada has been investigating complaints of voters being called and misdirected to the wrong polling station in the last federal election, and their probe has centred on Guelph. The Liberals ultimately held the riding in the May 2 ballot and even increased their margin of victory.
But Elections Canada alleges somebody in the campaign of Conservative candidate Marty Burke had a “customer relationship” with RackNine, an Alberta firm that distributes telephone messages and was used in the attempt to misdirect voters in Guelph. It says in court filings it believes this relationship “related to the misleading calls made to Guelph area electors.”
Agency investigator Allan Mathews says in court documents that he found Guelph Conservative campaign phones called RackNine 30 times during the election campaign, but he nevertheless found no Burke campaign receipts for payments to the Alberta company.
“I believe the individuals(s) behind the misleading calls … would not want a local campaign to be identified with the calls, as they amount to improper activity, and consequently I believe that any expense would likely be omitted from a campaign return,” Mr. Mathews said in the court filing.
The Elections Canada probe found three Burke campaign phones dialled RackNine during the campaign.
However, Andrew Prescott, deputy campaign manager for Mr. Burke’s campaign, said Tuesday he used the phones to call RackNine for legitimate reasons. He said RackNine was used in part to deliver messages countering a series of fraudulent calls Conservative voters received telling them polls were closing early.
He said the reason RackNine didn’t show up on Mr. Burke’s expense forms was because he was working for the campaign as an individual contractor and was not billing Mr. Burke for the cost of the calls. Mr. Prescott said he did nothing wrong and is cooperating with the Elections Canada probe.
Elections Canada’s Mr. Mathews said in court filings he believes the Guelph robo-calls are linked to a Virgin Mobile disposable cellphone registered to the improbably named “Pierre Poutine of Separatist Street” in Joliette, Que. The inspiration for this alias is unknown, but there is a Pierre’s Poutine restaurant in Guelph.
Disposable phones – also called “burner phones” – are prepaid phones with lax registration requirements.
The alias Pierre Poutine hid the identity of whomever owned the cellphone, which was only activated in late April of 2011.
NDP MP Pat Martin pounced on the use of a disposable phone, saying it shows how untoward the scheme was. “Only dope dealers and Hells Angels and Tony Soprano use burner cellphones,” he said.
It turned out to be an exceptionally important piece of evidence for Elections Canada.
Guelph voters with call display reported seeing its number – 450-760-7746 – show up when they received the robo-calls misdirecting them to an exceptionally busy polling station.
In reality, the automated calls originated from RackNine in Alberta. Elections Canada alleges, however, that a tactic known as “spoofing” was used to instead make it seem as if they were coming from this 450-area code cellphone.
The agency suggests the robo-calls caused chaos on election day as an estimated 150 to 200 voters showed up at the wrong polling station and were told they had to vote elsewhere. A polling official at the station in the Old Quebec Street Mall described for Elections Canada how “some electors just stormed out of the polling station” while others “ripped up their [voter identification cards] which suggested they had no longer any intention of casting a ballot.”
Elections Canada makes it clear in court filings that it does not believe the robo-calling firm, RackNine, engaged in suspicious activity.
Separately, Mr. Sona – who worked on the Burke campaign in Guelph – told CTV News that his hands were clean.
“I have remained silent to this point with the hope that the real guilty party would be apprehended,” Michael Sona said.
“I had no involvement in the fraudulent phone calls, which also targeted our supporters as can be attested to by our local campaign team and phone records.”
He said he only resigned as an aide to Mississauga MP Eve Adams last week because allegations made it impossible to do his job.
Mr. Sona made news during the 2011 election campaign when he publicly objected to a polling station at the University of Guelph. The director of communications for Mr. Burke, Mr. Sona burst into the front foyer of the campus University Centre declaring the polling station illegal, according to accounts from students who described themselves as non-partisan.
With a report from Kim Mackrael in Toronto
Classic textbook House of Commons pot calling kettle black?
'Pierre Poutine' fingered in Elections Canada robo-call probe
Pierre Lachapelle is the owner of Pierre's Poutne restaurant in downtown Geulph. His restaruant is near the phony voting site where automated phone calls steered voters.
By Bruce Champion-Smith
A disposable cellphone behind the robe-calls to Guelph voters in the 2011 election was registered to Pierre Poutine, of Separatist Street in Joliette, Quebec.
Pierre Lachapelle is the owner of Pierre's Poutne restaurant in downtown Geulph. His restaruant is near the phony voting site where automated phone calls steered voters.
By Bruce Champion-Smith
A disposable cellphone behind the robe-calls to Guelph voters in the 2011 election was registered to Pierre Poutine, of Separatist Street in Joliette, Quebec.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
"Commissioner Paulson, arrest that man immediately without a warrant he doesn't support C-30 so he's a child pornographer!"
By Sarah Schmidt, Postmedia News
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
The federal government's online surveillance bill triggered an anonymous online campaign that aired details of Public Safety Minister Vic Toews messy divorce. (Photograph Chris Wattie, Ruuters/Postmedia News)
Quick! Name Manitoba's current senators? You don't know or care do you?
By Paul McLeod/Ottawa Bureau
Monday, February 27, 2012
Halifax MP Megan Leslie says the senate is so unimportant that she doubts most Nova Scotians know who their senators are. (The Canadian Press)
“I am hard pressed to actually name the senators from Nova Scotia,” she said Monday in the House of Commons.
“I am a member of Parliament for the province of Nova Scotia and I cannot tell you their names.
“They are non-existent in our province. They are not out there meeting with people. They are not out there talking about issues. I don’t know what they do.”
The New Democrat made her comments during debate on the government’s Senate reform bill. Leslie’s position, and that of the NDP, is that the Senate should be flat-out abolished.
Leslie did go on to praise local senators James Cowan, Donald Oliver and Jane Cordy for their community work.
(Told that Leslie knew his name, Cowan responded: “Oh good, that Christmas card wasn’t in vain then.” He also suggested she consult Google for the names of all nine Nova Scotia senators.)
In a later interview, The Chronicle Herald asked Leslie to name Nova Scotia’s nine senators, who are all either Conservatives or Liberals. She got as far as six, with a couple of half-names such as “a MacDonald” — in this case, Senator Michael MacDonald, a Conservative.
The pop quiz was somewhat skewed because by this time News 95.7 radio host Jordi Morgan had already sent Leslie a Wikipedia article listing the senators.
The name recognition issue might extend both ways. Whether an unintentional slip or a subtle dig, a couple of senators contacted Monday referred to the Halifax MP as “Leslie Megan.”
Leslie’s main point was that while many senators might be good and intelligent people, they toe the party line instead of sticking up for their regions. Regional advocacy was the original intention of the upper house of Parliament.
“They cannot put their party allegiance aside,” she said. “They are doing what the centre is telling them to do, and they are not standing up for Nova Scotia.”
Sen. Kelvin Ogilvie, a Conservative, remarked that Leslie wasn’t allowing reality to interfere with her campaign to kill the Senate.
Ogilvie said senators are closely involved in their communities but less well-known than elected MPs because senators are supposed to focus on analytical committee work and avoid political ground wars.
“That means that you don’t have to eat every rubber chicken that is going in your constituency or kiss every baby that’s born,” he said. “You can use that time to actually analyze very substantive issues.”
As for senators standing against their parties, Ogilvie asked when Leslie ever voted against the NDP. Senator. Gerald Comeau asked the same question.
Comeau, a Conservative, said many regional concerns are raised in caucus meetings. He said the influence of most senators would be exerted before legislation was even introduced, and having to publicly oppose your party would signal a failure to explain your case at the caucus level.
As for the value of the Senate, Cowan noted that earlier Monday he and his Liberal colleagues had introduced legislation to amend the government’s omnibus crime bill. The amendments were originally brought up in the House of Commons but the government voted them down, only realizing when it was too late that they were necessary.
Cowan noted several examples of problems in legislation that passed through the House of Commons only to be caught in the Senate.
But Cowan, Ogilvie and Comeau all said they favour some degree of Senate reform, ranging from term limits to an elected Senate.
Update!
Good Day Readers:
You may recall late last week we sent Michael Enright host of CBC Radio's weekly public affairs program The Sunday Edition (9:00 - 12:00 national network) the following:
Dear Mr. Enright:
Recently, we had occasion to attend a high-profile lengthy murder trial still underway in Winnipeg. One of the many witnesses was an RCMP Officer from Churchill, Manitoba. Because of procedural delays, the Corporal had to be held over a couple extra days. As word spread among the attending public, he was increasingly approached and asked about the polar bears during recesses.
We were particularly fascinated by a couple stories he told about wolves which ran completely counter to the popular conception. You can read about it in our Friday, February 24 posting, "Believe it!"
Fast forward to earlier this morning and your interview with new RCMP Commissioner Robert Paulson on occasion of his first 100 days in office. At one point the Commissioner mentioned there are countless success stories that never get told given the media's tendency to focus on the negative.
Well, we invite any Mountie anywhere with a feel good story to contact us. They can self-identify, use "Anonymous" or a pseudonym of their choosing.
We received the following yesterday:
Thanks, Clare ... an excellent point. We may use a portion of your letter on this weeks' show.
Best Wishes,
Susan Mahoney
Acting Executive Producer
The Sunday Edition
Update
After Corporal Friesen departed we realized we'd neglected to give him CyberSmokeBlog's address so he could check out our upcoming posting about wolves. Fortunately, in talking with the Crown prosecuting the second degree murder trial (Wendy Dawson), he'll be returning latter this week on business and plans to spend a little time observing proceedings. We'll be able to give him a heads up to stay close to his radio on Sunday morning if he can.
You may recall late last week we sent Michael Enright host of CBC Radio's weekly public affairs program The Sunday Edition (9:00 - 12:00 national network) the following:
Dear Mr. Enright:
Recently, we had occasion to attend a high-profile lengthy murder trial still underway in Winnipeg. One of the many witnesses was an RCMP Officer from Churchill, Manitoba. Because of procedural delays, the Corporal had to be held over a couple extra days. As word spread among the attending public, he was increasingly approached and asked about the polar bears during recesses.
We were particularly fascinated by a couple stories he told about wolves which ran completely counter to the popular conception. You can read about it in our Friday, February 24 posting, "Believe it!"
Fast forward to earlier this morning and your interview with new RCMP Commissioner Robert Paulson on occasion of his first 100 days in office. At one point the Commissioner mentioned there are countless success stories that never get told given the media's tendency to focus on the negative.
Well, we invite any Mountie anywhere with a feel good story to contact us. They can self-identify, use "Anonymous" or a pseudonym of their choosing.
We received the following yesterday:
Thanks, Clare ... an excellent point. We may use a portion of your letter on this weeks' show.
Best Wishes,
Susan Mahoney
Acting Executive Producer
The Sunday Edition
Update
After Corporal Friesen departed we realized we'd neglected to give him CyberSmokeBlog's address so he could check out our upcoming posting about wolves. Fortunately, in talking with the Crown prosecuting the second degree murder trial (Wendy Dawson), he'll be returning latter this week on business and plans to spend a little time observing proceedings. We'll be able to give him a heads up to stay close to his radio on Sunday morning if he can.
Ongoing technical problems at Queen's Bench File Registry?
Dear CyberSmokeBlog:
The internet web server at www.jus.gov.mb.ca has been displaying the message:
"Court Registry System - The site is currently down for maintenance."
In excess of a week now of which I am aware. While the site has displayed the same message for brief periods of time in the past, usually minutes or hours, it appears that the site has currently been made unavailable to the public, either deliberately or unintentionally far in excess of past routine maintenance and/or updates.
Would you please determine if there is a short term technical problem that an or will be corrected in short order, or if there has been a policy change in regards to making this service available to the public.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Manitoba Curmudgeon@shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Curmudgeon:
Since we got to your e-mail around 6:30 yesterday evening we randomly tried the site 3-times one of which displayed the error message. We severely doubt there's anything sinister involved, rather, a simple technical glitch. If Queen's Bench File Registry were to suspend this service the legal community would be rioting in the streets - if that's possible for them.
While at The Law Courts this morning we'll give a copy of your e-mail to the appropriate officials along with our electronic address and an invitation to respond. Any reply received will be published. While still on the subject of QBFR, for about a week now we've been unsuccessfully on the trail of FD08-01-86932 better known as Lorraine Kathleen Fehr versus Victor Eric Toews. Seems it's never available. As best we can ascertain it appears it's resident with an administration official(s) somewhere within The Law Courts - having a good read are we?
Shortly, we'll be contacting a senior administrative official in writing requesting instructions on the procedure for formally requesting access to this file.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
The internet web server at www.jus.gov.mb.ca has been displaying the message:
"Court Registry System - The site is currently down for maintenance."
In excess of a week now of which I am aware. While the site has displayed the same message for brief periods of time in the past, usually minutes or hours, it appears that the site has currently been made unavailable to the public, either deliberately or unintentionally far in excess of past routine maintenance and/or updates.
Would you please determine if there is a short term technical problem that an or will be corrected in short order, or if there has been a policy change in regards to making this service available to the public.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Manitoba Curmudgeon@shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Curmudgeon:
Since we got to your e-mail around 6:30 yesterday evening we randomly tried the site 3-times one of which displayed the error message. We severely doubt there's anything sinister involved, rather, a simple technical glitch. If Queen's Bench File Registry were to suspend this service the legal community would be rioting in the streets - if that's possible for them.
While at The Law Courts this morning we'll give a copy of your e-mail to the appropriate officials along with our electronic address and an invitation to respond. Any reply received will be published. While still on the subject of QBFR, for about a week now we've been unsuccessfully on the trail of FD08-01-86932 better known as Lorraine Kathleen Fehr versus Victor Eric Toews. Seems it's never available. As best we can ascertain it appears it's resident with an administration official(s) somewhere within The Law Courts - having a good read are we?
Shortly, we'll be contacting a senior administrative official in writing requesting instructions on the procedure for formally requesting access to this file.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Monday, February 27, 2012
Never mind robocalls you need speed-dial-a-lawyer!
Hello Again Readers:
For the second time within days a Winnipeg Member of Parliament has received another defamation warning letter. From the Feburary 26, 2012 Canadian Press article, More ridings were hit by alleged voter suppression: opposition .....
Meanwhile, lawyers for RackNine Incorporated, an Edmonton- based automated dialling company that worked on the Conservative campaign, has sent a letter to Mr. Martin demanding an apology or face a defamation suit for comments he made about the company.
Mr. Martin says he has no intention of apologizing.
Why Pat Martin doesn't save his comments for the House of Commons where he's defamation proof is beyond us. There he could knock himself out defaming whoever and whatever until he's blue in the face or the cows come home - whichever comes first. Silly, silly man!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Libel Notice - Pat Martin
For the second time within days a Winnipeg Member of Parliament has received another defamation warning letter. From the Feburary 26, 2012 Canadian Press article, More ridings were hit by alleged voter suppression: opposition .....
Meanwhile, lawyers for RackNine Incorporated, an Edmonton- based automated dialling company that worked on the Conservative campaign, has sent a letter to Mr. Martin demanding an apology or face a defamation suit for comments he made about the company.
Mr. Martin says he has no intention of apologizing.
Why Pat Martin doesn't save his comments for the House of Commons where he's defamation proof is beyond us. There he could knock himself out defaming whoever and whatever until he's blue in the face or the cows come home - whichever comes first. Silly, silly man!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Libel Notice - Pat Martin
A bicycle, a mountie and the holy spirit!
Spent the day at the Mark Stobbe second degree murder trial - a couple interesting developments. So far a multitude of witnesses have been called all testifying they saw a large person on a bicycle near where Beverley Rowbotham's body was found. However, the gentleman on the stand claimed he passed within approximately 30 feet in his car of someone wearing dark clothing. When asked if he could identify the bicycle he indicated it looked like Ms Rowbotham's mauve raleigh resting in the courtroom. Surprisingly, defence counsel Tim Killeen did not challenge.
The morning's final witness was an RCMP officer who was part of a three member team who surveilled Mr. Stobbe for 12-days beginning in late October of 2000. Ever curious we asked a lawyer whether police require a warrant. Answer? No.
Postscript
Had to smile. In courtroom 226 presided over by Justice Gerald L. Chartier there was a pre-trial conference for Smith versus Holy Spirit. Wonder who represented Holy Spirit?
Sorry Vic!
Good Day Readers:
It's hard to feel sorry for Vic Toews. Given he's a politician on the national scene, did he make any effort to have a judge seal his divorce file at the time? Would such a request have been granted? As far back as a couple years the Winnipeg Sun was reporting on it. Hell, even Wikipedia carries this comment:
In 2008, Toews divorced from his wife of 30 years, Lorraine Kathleen Fehr, after it was discovered that he fathered a child with a younger woman who may have been his child's babysitter. This incident later became publicized in February 2012, when an anonymous Twitter account began revealing information from Toews' divorce affidavit as reaction to the introduction of Bill-30.
For better or worse, good or bad politics is a game of knives. Be forewarned those choosing to enter public life. If you have skeleton(s) in your closet ..... The open courts principle in Canada is far, far more important than someone like Vic Toews. Sorry Vic, details of your divorce, like everyone else's, is public domain information so don't complain.
Besides, dirty tricks is nothing new just look at the latest Robocalls controversy.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Internet surveillance bill backlash, internet ‘guerilla war’ take Canada across political Rubicon, ‘hugely disturbing’
It's hard to feel sorry for Vic Toews. Given he's a politician on the national scene, did he make any effort to have a judge seal his divorce file at the time? Would such a request have been granted? As far back as a couple years the Winnipeg Sun was reporting on it. Hell, even Wikipedia carries this comment:
In 2008, Toews divorced from his wife of 30 years, Lorraine Kathleen Fehr, after it was discovered that he fathered a child with a younger woman who may have been his child's babysitter. This incident later became publicized in February 2012, when an anonymous Twitter account began revealing information from Toews' divorce affidavit as reaction to the introduction of Bill-30.
For better or worse, good or bad politics is a game of knives. Be forewarned those choosing to enter public life. If you have skeleton(s) in your closet ..... The open courts principle in Canada is far, far more important than someone like Vic Toews. Sorry Vic, details of your divorce, like everyone else's, is public domain information so don't complain.
Besides, dirty tricks is nothing new just look at the latest Robocalls controversy.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Internet surveillance bill backlash, internet ‘guerilla war’ take Canada across political Rubicon, ‘hugely disturbing’
MPs say Anonymous ‘smears and attacks’ against Public Safety Minister Vic Toews should be viewed as a form of cowardice.
By Tim Naumetz
Monday, February, 27, 2012
PARLIAMENT HILL—Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’ explosive suggestion that
opponents of the government’s sweeping internet surveillance bill side with
child pornographers, and the threat of government control over the web, have
sparked an internet “guerrilla war” between the Conservatives and anonymous foes
that the government may be unable to defeat, says Nanos Research pollster Nik
Nanos.
And, after opponents of the legislation, Bill C-30, circulated personal details of Mr. Toews’ divorce on the worldwide activist internet platform Anonymous, along with a warning that more was coming and other Members of Parliament had to watch their words, NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ontario) told The Hill Times the furor Mr. Toews and the legislation sparked have taken Canada across a “political Rubicon.”
Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro (Peterborough, Ontario) said he believes the Anonymous threat against MPs, warning them not to try to “score political points” by linking Anonymous to any specific political party, looked like an attempt at intimidation.
“It certainly appears to be,” Mr. Del Mastro who told The Hill Times in an earlier email following the Anonymous posts: “I believe that Anonymous smears and attacks should be viewed as a form of cowardice and discouraged by all members of a decent and democratic society.”
The employment of Anonymous, an information disclosure weapon for a range of global activists, covering everything from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to globalization to anti-capitalism, and other web platforms that can be used anonymously, such as Twitter, has taken the Conservative government into a realm of politics it has not before faced, Mr. Nanos said.
“I think this is a particular issue where the Conservatives are going to deal with a different kind of guerrilla warfare, probably a type of guerrilla warfare that they can’t win, because of the anonymity on the world wide web and the fact that people of like mind who disagree with the government can wage their own dirty tricks campaign,” Mr. Nanos said.
Mr. Nanos argued the Conservatives walked into the confrontation without realizing the difference between threatened government control over the internet, and its implications for web freedom, and the smaller numbers of citizens who were affected each time through a series of controversial measures the Conservatives have undertaken since 2006.
“The thing is that this particular issue affects the day to day lives of almost all Canadians, whether they’re socializing or doing business or seeking out information online, you’re going to tune into this particular issue because it means that there is a possibility that someone could snoop into your behaviour,” Mr. Nanos said.
“One of the great attractions that the internet has, the world wide web, is not just the scope of information and the richness of information that’s out there, but the whole idea that there is not a lot of government intervention in the internet,” he said. “That’s probably one of the reasons why many Canadians think that the internet is a vibrant, active place, because the hand of the government is not heavy in the internet, in the free world.”
“Canadians do know that technology cannot only be an enabler of freedom but also an enabler of greater control, I think that’s why Canadians are particularly sensitive to this issue, more so than a lot of the other controversial issues that the Conservatives have dealt with, because this not only could affect their day to day lives, it also is part of a world view on the internet being free and open,” Mr. Nanos said.
“The irony is that the internet has been a key vehicle for transparency in government, maybe Wikileaks is damaging to certain people in the public policy process, but it’s not in terms of transparency and accountability,” said Mr. Nanos.
Mr. Angus, while laying blame on Mr. Toews, said the anonymous nature of the battle, however, could undermine political life in Canada, even though the Anonymous activists have taken the same side on Bill C-30. In fact, there is no guarantee the Anonymous attacks from Mr. Toews were from activists; they might have been from his enemies in other political parties.
Mr. Toews’ divorce affidavits were posted on YouTube through Anonymous after The Ottawa Citizen published a report saying it had tracked down initial tweets containing the same divorce information on an anonymous Twitter account, Vikileaks, and that the computer used for the Twitter posts was in the House of Commons.
“I’m very disturbed by this sort of anonymous attacks that can be generated,” said Mr. Angus. “I think we have crossed a political Rubicon. It’s been coming, Twitter is really a bully’s alley in a lot of ways, the ability of people to get anonymous names and then just send hate stuff to MPs, or to each other.”
Page 2 of 2
“I think Vic Toews didn’t handle himself very well, I think his sort of over-the-top, bombastic rhetoric created a push back, but now I think, for political operatives, they could use similar tactics to hide fake name groups to go after political enemies, so there’s a hugely disturbing element in what’s happening,” Mr. Angus said.
“At the same time, these are the kind of groups that C-30 could go after, I think the government has opened up a Pandora’s Box and there’s a lot of stuff coming out that’s not good for the body politic,” Mr. Angus said.
“Some of this stuff is small potatoes, but I think it’s going to dawn on political operatives to say ‘Well, let’s just set up a fake Twitter account under a fake name for a fake reason and dump dirt on our opponents.’
That’s disturbing,” Mr. Angus said.
Mr. Toews’s unknown attackers through Anonymous—after their first disclosure of the divorce proceedings, followed by detailed information about the young woman Mr. Toews left his former wife for, and allegations he arranged a job for her at the office of another Manitoba MP—warned last week that he should expect further attacks.
“Let it be known this is only a taste of the information we have access to and this is only the beginning,” the computerized voice of a woman posted on YouTube said.
“And to the rest of the Parliament of Canada, you would do well to mind your words about Anonymous,” the voice said. “Any attempt to score political points by claiming we are associated with a particular party will not be met kindly. Your party affiliations are utterly irrelevant to us.”
The RCMP, meanwhile, is investigating complaints from either Mr. Toews or someone on his behalf that he has received separate violent threats, and House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Saskatchewan) has launched an internal Commons investigation to find the computer source of the Vikileaks divorce postings in Twitter, along with an investigation into complaints from Mr. Toews that an employee of the Commons flooded his office email systems with harassing emails.
The government told The Hill Times last week it will move a motion to send Bill C-30 to the Public Safety and National Security Committee, at the earliest next week, which would give opposition MPs the opportunity to propose amendments before the bill reaches a vote-in-principle in the Commons.
But Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac Saint Louis, Quebec) said he believes the government is sending the bill into committee so soon in an attempt to defuse the growing controversy.
“The government will try to suppress meaningful amendments, I’m positive of that,” Mr. Scarpaleggia said.
“It swept the bill under the rug pretty quickly by sending it to committee after the firestorm Vic Toews created, but I’m sure they are hoping that once it’s in committee the grinding nature of committee business will somehow keep people from being interested in this issue, and they can use their majority on committee to essentially keep the bill the way it is,” said Mr. Scarpaleggia.
tnaumetz@hilltimes.com
And, after opponents of the legislation, Bill C-30, circulated personal details of Mr. Toews’ divorce on the worldwide activist internet platform Anonymous, along with a warning that more was coming and other Members of Parliament had to watch their words, NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ontario) told The Hill Times the furor Mr. Toews and the legislation sparked have taken Canada across a “political Rubicon.”
Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro (Peterborough, Ontario) said he believes the Anonymous threat against MPs, warning them not to try to “score political points” by linking Anonymous to any specific political party, looked like an attempt at intimidation.
“It certainly appears to be,” Mr. Del Mastro who told The Hill Times in an earlier email following the Anonymous posts: “I believe that Anonymous smears and attacks should be viewed as a form of cowardice and discouraged by all members of a decent and democratic society.”
The employment of Anonymous, an information disclosure weapon for a range of global activists, covering everything from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to globalization to anti-capitalism, and other web platforms that can be used anonymously, such as Twitter, has taken the Conservative government into a realm of politics it has not before faced, Mr. Nanos said.
“I think this is a particular issue where the Conservatives are going to deal with a different kind of guerrilla warfare, probably a type of guerrilla warfare that they can’t win, because of the anonymity on the world wide web and the fact that people of like mind who disagree with the government can wage their own dirty tricks campaign,” Mr. Nanos said.
Mr. Nanos argued the Conservatives walked into the confrontation without realizing the difference between threatened government control over the internet, and its implications for web freedom, and the smaller numbers of citizens who were affected each time through a series of controversial measures the Conservatives have undertaken since 2006.
“The thing is that this particular issue affects the day to day lives of almost all Canadians, whether they’re socializing or doing business or seeking out information online, you’re going to tune into this particular issue because it means that there is a possibility that someone could snoop into your behaviour,” Mr. Nanos said.
“One of the great attractions that the internet has, the world wide web, is not just the scope of information and the richness of information that’s out there, but the whole idea that there is not a lot of government intervention in the internet,” he said. “That’s probably one of the reasons why many Canadians think that the internet is a vibrant, active place, because the hand of the government is not heavy in the internet, in the free world.”
“Canadians do know that technology cannot only be an enabler of freedom but also an enabler of greater control, I think that’s why Canadians are particularly sensitive to this issue, more so than a lot of the other controversial issues that the Conservatives have dealt with, because this not only could affect their day to day lives, it also is part of a world view on the internet being free and open,” Mr. Nanos said.
“The irony is that the internet has been a key vehicle for transparency in government, maybe Wikileaks is damaging to certain people in the public policy process, but it’s not in terms of transparency and accountability,” said Mr. Nanos.
Mr. Angus, while laying blame on Mr. Toews, said the anonymous nature of the battle, however, could undermine political life in Canada, even though the Anonymous activists have taken the same side on Bill C-30. In fact, there is no guarantee the Anonymous attacks from Mr. Toews were from activists; they might have been from his enemies in other political parties.
Mr. Toews’ divorce affidavits were posted on YouTube through Anonymous after The Ottawa Citizen published a report saying it had tracked down initial tweets containing the same divorce information on an anonymous Twitter account, Vikileaks, and that the computer used for the Twitter posts was in the House of Commons.
“I’m very disturbed by this sort of anonymous attacks that can be generated,” said Mr. Angus. “I think we have crossed a political Rubicon. It’s been coming, Twitter is really a bully’s alley in a lot of ways, the ability of people to get anonymous names and then just send hate stuff to MPs, or to each other.”
Page 2 of 2
“I think Vic Toews didn’t handle himself very well, I think his sort of over-the-top, bombastic rhetoric created a push back, but now I think, for political operatives, they could use similar tactics to hide fake name groups to go after political enemies, so there’s a hugely disturbing element in what’s happening,” Mr. Angus said.
“At the same time, these are the kind of groups that C-30 could go after, I think the government has opened up a Pandora’s Box and there’s a lot of stuff coming out that’s not good for the body politic,” Mr. Angus said.
“Some of this stuff is small potatoes, but I think it’s going to dawn on political operatives to say ‘Well, let’s just set up a fake Twitter account under a fake name for a fake reason and dump dirt on our opponents.’
That’s disturbing,” Mr. Angus said.
Mr. Toews’s unknown attackers through Anonymous—after their first disclosure of the divorce proceedings, followed by detailed information about the young woman Mr. Toews left his former wife for, and allegations he arranged a job for her at the office of another Manitoba MP—warned last week that he should expect further attacks.
“Let it be known this is only a taste of the information we have access to and this is only the beginning,” the computerized voice of a woman posted on YouTube said.
“And to the rest of the Parliament of Canada, you would do well to mind your words about Anonymous,” the voice said. “Any attempt to score political points by claiming we are associated with a particular party will not be met kindly. Your party affiliations are utterly irrelevant to us.”
The RCMP, meanwhile, is investigating complaints from either Mr. Toews or someone on his behalf that he has received separate violent threats, and House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Saskatchewan) has launched an internal Commons investigation to find the computer source of the Vikileaks divorce postings in Twitter, along with an investigation into complaints from Mr. Toews that an employee of the Commons flooded his office email systems with harassing emails.
The government told The Hill Times last week it will move a motion to send Bill C-30 to the Public Safety and National Security Committee, at the earliest next week, which would give opposition MPs the opportunity to propose amendments before the bill reaches a vote-in-principle in the Commons.
But Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac Saint Louis, Quebec) said he believes the government is sending the bill into committee so soon in an attempt to defuse the growing controversy.
“The government will try to suppress meaningful amendments, I’m positive of that,” Mr. Scarpaleggia said.
“It swept the bill under the rug pretty quickly by sending it to committee after the firestorm Vic Toews created, but I’m sure they are hoping that once it’s in committee the grinding nature of committee business will somehow keep people from being interested in this issue, and they can use their majority on committee to essentially keep the bill the way it is,” said Mr. Scarpaleggia.
tnaumetz@hilltimes.com
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sergeant Preston of The North-West Mounted Police and his trusty dog 'Yukon King' stories ..... coming soon?
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Dear Mr. Enright:
The other day we attended a high-profile, lengthy murder trial we're covering in Winnipeg that's still underway. One of the many witnesses was an RCMP Officer from Churchill, Manitoba. Because of procedural delays, the Corporal had to be held over for a couple extra days. As word spread, he was increasingly asked by citizens during recesses about the polar bears.
We were particularly fascinated by a couple stories he told describing wolves which ran completely counter to the popular conception. You can read about it in our Friday, February 24 posting, Believe it!
Fast forward to this morning and your interview with new RCMP Commissioner Robert Paulson on occasion of his first 100-days in office. At one point the Commissioner mentioned there are countless success stories by Members that never get told given the media's tendency to focus more on the negative.
Well, we invite any Mountie with a feel good story to contact us. They can self-identify, use "Anonymous" or a pseudonym of their choosing.
Sincerely/Clare L. Pieuk
Media Citizen Journalist/Blog Master
www.CyberSmokeblog.blogspot.com
pieuk@shaw.ca
Enjoyed the "free" Canadian hospitality did we? What's it like?
Dean Beeby
Ottawa - The Canadian Press
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Prime Minister Stephen Harper personally approved a $21,865 hospitality tab for visiting European bureaucrats last fall even as the government was preaching fiscal restraint.
Newly disclosed documents show the three-day meeting featured a welcome reception at the National Gallery of Canada, two lunches, and a formal dinner at Rideau Hall – all of them featuring free wine.
More related to this story
Eat my McShorts?
Good Day Readers:
Natural law Number One: What goes around comes around.
Found this interesting document on Stephen Taylor's blog (www.stephentaylor.ca). Seems the NDP's Pat Martin is being threatened with a defamation lawsuit. This is the same Pat Martin with a penchant for using the "F-word" in his tweets or telling people who disagree to "eat my shorts." If Mr. Martin did indeed make the comments as alleged, should he not have had the presence of mind to do it the House of Commons where he's defamation proof? So how say you, are you going to govern yourself accordingly?
Which reminds us. Must go back to check on the status of a defamation lawsuit against another of our favourite politicians Shelly Glover. Recall she is one of a handful also being sued for alleged defamation by former Conservative Member of Parliament Helena Guergis. The deadline for filing Statements of Defence has passed.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Postscript
Nice name for a law firm - "McLaws." McLaws suing McMartins?
Sharp-copier@Parlee.com 20120224 111704
Natural law Number One: What goes around comes around.
Found this interesting document on Stephen Taylor's blog (www.stephentaylor.ca). Seems the NDP's Pat Martin is being threatened with a defamation lawsuit. This is the same Pat Martin with a penchant for using the "F-word" in his tweets or telling people who disagree to "eat my shorts." If Mr. Martin did indeed make the comments as alleged, should he not have had the presence of mind to do it the House of Commons where he's defamation proof? So how say you, are you going to govern yourself accordingly?
Which reminds us. Must go back to check on the status of a defamation lawsuit against another of our favourite politicians Shelly Glover. Recall she is one of a handful also being sued for alleged defamation by former Conservative Member of Parliament Helena Guergis. The deadline for filing Statements of Defence has passed.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Postscript
Nice name for a law firm - "McLaws." McLaws suing McMartins?
Sharp-copier@Parlee.com 20120224 111704
Saturday, February 25, 2012
By the numbers!
Good Day Readers:
We first became aware of Mr. Horgan's writing from his January 6, 2012 iPolitics article in which he took to task one of our "favourite" Senators Mike Duffy for certain "insightful" comments he'd made about Twitter:
Twitter seems so terribly banal I feel no motivation to take part in profound conversations of 140 characters or meaningless drivel, " ..... is a reflection of the people who do it ..... Part of the function of age is our sense of ourselves and where we fit in the world. It's for a young generation."
What the Harper government lead principally by Messrs Towes and Nicholson has managed to do is reminiscent of McCarthyism of the late 1940s to late 1950 during which time Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy (Wisconsin) chaired The House Un-American Activities hearings that were attached to various anti-communist activities spearheaded by the FBI. One would have thought there was a "pinko" under every bed.
By Colin Horgan
Friday, February 24, 2012
The discussion over C-30, the contentious lawful access bill the government proposed and that subsequently led to a visceral online backlash against Public Safety Minister Vic Toews (including the now infamous @Vikileaks30 Twitter account that took to publicizing the details of Toews’ divorce) has calmed down this week. Yet, even when it was raging, the meat of the phrase that really set the whole thing off – that the opposition, who took issue with the content of the bill could either “stand with us or with the child pornographers” – was left mostly by the wayside as the debate veered into a discussion on the tone of the rhetoric employed on both sides.
It all left a lot of questions still to be answered about how, exactly, the law is enforced online and what methods are used to do that, and, of course, the actual frequency of online child pornography.
To address the second question first: How much child pornography is being uncovered online by Canadian law enforcement?
It’s not as simple a statistic to present as perhaps Toews’ comments have suggested during the C-30 discussion, or other times when he’s mentioned protecting Canada’s youth from child pornography in the House on other crime-related topics during question period.
First of all, there’s a difference between communicating with a child online for the purpose of committing a sexual offence (child luring) and actual child pornography. An amendment was only made in 2002 to the Canadian Criminal Code to account for child luring, and more is uncovered every year as both police departments and technology adapts. That was also the same year amendments were made to the definition of child pornography to include using the internet as a way to commit offences. So the data we can get only goes back about a decade, and comes with a few caveats, as you’ll see in a minute.
In March 2009, Statistics Canada released a study on child luring. Here’s what they had to say at that point:
First, incidents of child luring since 2003:
Via the CCJS, there’s a note to be recognized when examining this data. It’s here:
Again, from the CCJS:
On that last point, another question that arose from the debate on C-30 was whether it was absolutely necessary (not to mention how much it might cost) to require companies operating online to hand over information without a warrant, as the legislation seemed to suggest when it was presented. Last week, Toews’ office sent around a few examples to the media of instances where, the suggestion was, solutions would have come about faster had the legislation being proposed been in effect. In two of the three situations Toews’ office provided, service providers were noted as being initially reluctant to hand over user data to the police. However, in both cases, the providers in question did just that, and eventually a fraudster and a suspect in a child abduction case were caught.
Part of the argument the government made with regard to C-30 was that it would help law enforcement officials accentuate their abilities to find nefarious individuals online. That’s probably worth examining, but just as much, it’s worth remembering that private companies are taking on some of that responsibility already.
That kind of proactive monitoring is highlighted in this piece from an upcoming issue of Forbes magazine where writer Kashmir Hill talks with the head of security at Facebook, Joe Sullivan. Facebook is not a service provider, but it is a company to which law enforcement turns more and more to obtain information about individuals, and Facebook posts have been used as evidence in a few court cases. The overview Hill writes provides an example of how companies are already implementing changes and working to guard against things like child pornography.
While the instances discussed in the piece (along with the legal frameworks) are American, there are a few parts of it that are worth highlighting in the context of Canada’s ongoing privacy debate – not to mention protections against online child pornography.
From Forbes:
We first became aware of Mr. Horgan's writing from his January 6, 2012 iPolitics article in which he took to task one of our "favourite" Senators Mike Duffy for certain "insightful" comments he'd made about Twitter:
Twitter seems so terribly banal I feel no motivation to take part in profound conversations of 140 characters or meaningless drivel, " ..... is a reflection of the people who do it ..... Part of the function of age is our sense of ourselves and where we fit in the world. It's for a young generation."
By the time Colin Horgan had finished he'd surgically dismantled Mike Duffy leaving him in pieces on the Senate floor where he belongs. You'll notice the good Senator has been silent on the subject since.
But of course CyberSmokeblog had to chime in with it's two sense worth offering that Mr. Duffy should shut his face and listen for a change especially concerning a subject about which he obviously knows nothing. We also reminded him of recent words from a Member of Parliament. To paraphrase, "Politicians who become arrogant and do not listen to those who elected them will quickly find themselves out in the cold on their arses. Canadians are not stupid."
Mr. Horgan not only has a very good writing touch but the man does his homework as you'll see from his latest article we found buried near the bottom of iPolitics' main page. It deserves much, much more recognition. The man is good - he is very good.
We beg to differ, however, with one small point in the Horgan article. Given today's announcement by the hacker group Anonymous the furor over Vic Toews beyond asinine comments may be far from over especially come a week from now if "Twitter" the cat is let out of the bag. Perhaps "Twitter" should be renamed "Vikileaks."
"Twitter" meets Vikileaks |
What the Harper government lead principally by Messrs Towes and Nicholson has managed to do is reminiscent of McCarthyism of the late 1940s to late 1950 during which time Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy (Wisconsin) chaired The House Un-American Activities hearings that were attached to various anti-communist activities spearheaded by the FBI. One would have thought there was a "pinko" under every bed.
Fast forward to today. Isn't it "deja vu all over again" (.....Yogi Berra) wherein the Harper government is trying to scare us into thinking there's a child pornographer or criminal under every bed so we'll suppor Bills C-30 and 51 which, in reality, are substantial overkill? The Horgan article is the first we've encountered that attempts to apply numbers to the issue.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
How many online child porn cases are there anyway?By Colin Horgan
Friday, February 24, 2012
The discussion over C-30, the contentious lawful access bill the government proposed and that subsequently led to a visceral online backlash against Public Safety Minister Vic Toews (including the now infamous @Vikileaks30 Twitter account that took to publicizing the details of Toews’ divorce) has calmed down this week. Yet, even when it was raging, the meat of the phrase that really set the whole thing off – that the opposition, who took issue with the content of the bill could either “stand with us or with the child pornographers” – was left mostly by the wayside as the debate veered into a discussion on the tone of the rhetoric employed on both sides.
It all left a lot of questions still to be answered about how, exactly, the law is enforced online and what methods are used to do that, and, of course, the actual frequency of online child pornography.
To address the second question first: How much child pornography is being uncovered online by Canadian law enforcement?
It’s not as simple a statistic to present as perhaps Toews’ comments have suggested during the C-30 discussion, or other times when he’s mentioned protecting Canada’s youth from child pornography in the House on other crime-related topics during question period.
First of all, there’s a difference between communicating with a child online for the purpose of committing a sexual offence (child luring) and actual child pornography. An amendment was only made in 2002 to the Canadian Criminal Code to account for child luring, and more is uncovered every year as both police departments and technology adapts. That was also the same year amendments were made to the definition of child pornography to include using the internet as a way to commit offences. So the data we can get only goes back about a decade, and comes with a few caveats, as you’ll see in a minute.
In March 2009, Statistics Canada released a study on child luring. Here’s what they had to say at that point:
In the most recent two-year period, 2006 to 2007, a total of 464 incidents of child luring were reported by police services across Canada. This figure represents an average of about 3 incidents of child luring per 100,000 youth under the age of 18, reported to police per year. […]I asked the folks over at the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics for some more concrete numbers and they were able to provide a few tables that I thought I’d share here. The original tables they provided included more information than I’ve copied for these purposes – for instance, how many of those charged were male (most) or female and the number of youth who were charged with these kinds of offences. (I’m happy to pass those on to those who email me, but for providing a simple glance at the instances of both offences in question, I felt this would suffice.)
Increases in the number of child luring incidents coming to the attention of police follow heightened efforts to raise awareness of child luring. For example, subsequent to the introduction of the new legislation on child luring, the National Strategy to Protect Children from Sexual Exploitation on the Internet was established in 2004 to help expand resources to combat online child sexual exploitation.
First, incidents of child luring since 2003:
Via the CCJS, there’s a note to be recognized when examining this data. It’s here:
In April 2002, the Criminal Code of Canada was amended to include new offences making it illegal to communicate with children over the Internet for the purpose of committing a sexual offence. It is difficult to ascertain whether the increase in these child luring offences reported to police is the result of increased efforts to raise public awareness, or of other factors such as advances in police efforts to capture online predators, or of an actual increase in the number of child luring incidents. Therefore, comparisons over time should be made with caution.Here’s a chart of incidents of child pornography:
Again, from the CCJS:
NOTE: In 2002, legislative changes were made to include the use of the Internet for the purpose of committing child pornography offences. As such, comparisons over time should be made with caution. The UCR violation of Child Pornography includes possession of child pornography, accessing child pornography, as well as making and distributing child pornography.So, instances of online child porn and luring appear to be increasing, but those numbers are dependent on a number of changing factors, including the way various individuals or groups (police, private companies, ISPs) are developing new approaches to the technology.
On that last point, another question that arose from the debate on C-30 was whether it was absolutely necessary (not to mention how much it might cost) to require companies operating online to hand over information without a warrant, as the legislation seemed to suggest when it was presented. Last week, Toews’ office sent around a few examples to the media of instances where, the suggestion was, solutions would have come about faster had the legislation being proposed been in effect. In two of the three situations Toews’ office provided, service providers were noted as being initially reluctant to hand over user data to the police. However, in both cases, the providers in question did just that, and eventually a fraudster and a suspect in a child abduction case were caught.
Part of the argument the government made with regard to C-30 was that it would help law enforcement officials accentuate their abilities to find nefarious individuals online. That’s probably worth examining, but just as much, it’s worth remembering that private companies are taking on some of that responsibility already.
That kind of proactive monitoring is highlighted in this piece from an upcoming issue of Forbes magazine where writer Kashmir Hill talks with the head of security at Facebook, Joe Sullivan. Facebook is not a service provider, but it is a company to which law enforcement turns more and more to obtain information about individuals, and Facebook posts have been used as evidence in a few court cases. The overview Hill writes provides an example of how companies are already implementing changes and working to guard against things like child pornography.
While the instances discussed in the piece (along with the legal frameworks) are American, there are a few parts of it that are worth highlighting in the context of Canada’s ongoing privacy debate – not to mention protections against online child pornography.
From Forbes:
The company gives law enforcement “basic subscriber information” on requests accompanied by subpoenas: a user’s name, e-mail address and IP address (which reveals approximate location). Sullivan insists that everything else—photos, status updates, private messages, friend lists, group memberships, pokes and all the rest—requires a warrant.That provision is outlined in Facebook’s data use policy, which also mentions its general approach to responding to legal requests. Here’s what that data use policy says in full (emphasis added):
We may share your information in response to a legal request (like a search warrant, court order or subpoena) if we have a good faith belief that the law requires us to do so. This may include responding to legal requests from jurisdictions outside of the United States where we have a good faith belief that the response is required by law in that jurisdiction, affects users in that jurisdiction, and is consistent with internationally recognized standards. We may also share information when we have a good faith belief it is necessary to: detect, prevent and address fraud and other illegal activity; to protect ourselves and you from violations of our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities; and to prevent death or imminent bodily harm.In her piece, Hill describes an instance where Facebook’s own work pointed out a potential pedophile:
The site employs algorithms to detect suspicious behavior and bring it to the attention of Sullivan’s group. “We found that a youth pastor and children’s sports coach in Indiana was using fake accounts to try to engage with kids on our site,” he says. “So we called the FBI in Indiana and sent them his information.” […]
Last year Facebook adopted a Microsoft program called PhotoDNA, which scans every picture uploaded to the site to see if it matches known child porn images compiled by the FBI’s National Crime Information Center. “Our list of child porn images is actually much longer than the FBI’s,” says Sullivan. “Every time we find something new—through a user report or flagging on a keyword—we manually review the user album to see if there are other images that should be added to the list, and then we add them to our library. We’re exploring how to share our library with others.”