It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by soficrow
"These reports and agreements reveal a very disturbing fact. Prime Minister Martin and his Ministers are not setting policy for Canada. They are taking instructions from the USA's president Bush and doing his bidding.
The Modernization of Investigative Techniques Act (MITA) is intended to ensure that telecommunications service providers build and maintain an interception capability on their networks that allows for the lawful interception of communications by law enforcement agencies and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). Similar legislation is already in place in many countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Australia. This Act will also require service providers to provide subscriber contact information upon request and in accordance with strict privacy safeguards. The following is an overview of key provisions within MITA.
Under MITA, telecommunications service providers will also be required to provide to designated officials, upon request, a subscriber’s contact information. This includes a subscriber’s name and address, telephone number, e-mail address, Internet Protocol address and similar basic identifiers.
Lawful interception is not used to monitor everyone’s telephone and Internet communications and MITA will not change that. The interception of communications can only be done with legal authority and MITA will not change in any way existing authorities to intercept communications. The Government of Canada is firmly committed to protecting the privacy rights of Canadians.
MITA will not provide law enforcement or CSIS with any new interception powers. Interception powers exist in the Criminal Code (since 1974), Canadian Security Intelligence Services Act (since 1984) and other Acts of Parliament. MITA will not change these existing authorities in any way.
There are currently a variety of practices in releasing subscriber contact information. In some instances services providers may request a warrant and in others they may not. What MITA will do is put in place a consistent way of doing things.
The Government of Canada is firmly committed to protecting the privacy rights of Canadians. This legislation is the result of extensive consultations and reflects the valuable input of many stakeholders including policing organizations, the telecommunications industry, privacy commissioners and human rights advocates. The privacy considerations included in this proposed legislation strike the right balance between the needs of police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to maintain their investigative capabilities in the face of new technology while respecting Canadians’ privacy.
Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act regulating telecommunications facilities to facilitate the lawful interception of information transmitted by means of those facilities and respecting the provision of telecommunications subscriber information”.
The purpose of this Act is to ensure that telecommunications service providers have the capability to enable national security and law enforcement agencies to exercise their authority to intercept communications, and to require service providers to provide subscriber and other information, without unreasonably impairing the privacy of individuals, the provision of telecommunications services to Canadians or the competitiveness of the Canadian telecommunications industry.
The Privacy Commissioner may, on reasonable notice, conduct an audit of the practices of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or the Commissioner of Competition to ensure compliance with sections 17 to 19 and the regulations made for the purposes of those sections and of the internal management and information systems and controls concerning requests made under sections 17 and 18. The provisions of the Privacy Act apply, with any necessary modifications, in respect of the audit as if it were an investigation under that Act.
2) Before making an order, the Governor in Council shall consider
(a) the extent to which the exemption would adversely affect national security or law enforcement;
(b) whether the telecommunications service providers can comply with the obligations from which they would be exempted;
(c) whether the costs of compliance with those obligations would have an unreasonable adverse effect on the business of the telecommunications service providers; and
(d) whether compliance with those obligations would unreasonably impair the provision of telecommunications services to Canadians or the competitiveness of the Canadian telecommunications industry.
50. No person shall do any of the following things in performing any obligation under this Act or in any application, declaration or report made under it:
(a) knowingly make a false or misleading statement or knowingly provide false or misleading information; or
(b) knowingly omit to state a material fact or to provide material information.
Originally posted by Umbrax
From what I've read so far I'm not very concerned about MITA violating my privacy. Getting into the bill further and with better comprehension may change my opinion.
I do find bills and contracts hard to read.
I think they do that on purpose .
The lawful interception of communications is provided for in legislation including the Criminal Code and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and always requires legal authority.
Law enforcement agencies and CSIS also require timely access to accurate subscriber information. Subscriber information under MITA is basic contact information, such as that found in a phone book, and includes a subscriber’s name, address, telephone number, e‑mail or Internet address.
While in some cases the information is provided upon request, in others search warrants are requested before disclosing this information.
Subscriber information is often required at the beginning of an investigation or for general policing duties. In these circumstances, the police may not be able to get a warrant given the little information available to them, and the time it would take in order to gather the necessary information for a warrant, where it is possible, can be critical to an investigation.
When police are investigating a crime and want phone records, they must seek a court order. Recent commissions of inquiry, like Justice John Gomery's probe of Adscam or the investigation into the computer leasing fiasco at Toronto city hall, had to issue subpoenas to compel telecom companies to share such data. Government efforts to expand their phone monitoring powers as part of the war on terror are being fought tooth and nail by privacy and civil liberties organizations. Most Canadians consider their call records privileged information, and the courts have backed them up time and time again.
Yet Maclean's was able to purchase the privacy commissioner's phone logs online from a U.S. data broker, no questions asked. For about US$200 per order, Locatecell.com delivered months of long-distance records from her Bell Canada home and cottage accounts. They were also able to access her Telus Mobility cellphone call logs for October -- a monthly bill she probably hadn't even received at the time. And all the Internet requests were turned around in a matter of hours. (In a test run, the company was also able to obtain the cell records of a senior Maclean's editor from Fido, a division of Rogers, the company that owns this magazine.) Reverse phone number lookup engines on federal government and phone company websites provided the identities of many of the people Stoddart called, or who called her. On Sept. 15, for example, there was a call from her Montreal home to a relative in Frelighsburgh, Que. On Oct. 15, she called the house of one of her communications advisers from her cellphone. And on Oct. 27, she twice called the desk of another. While many of the numbers on the bills were cellphones or unlisted, anyone looking to fill in the blanks would only have to call until they hit voicemail recordings.
Originally posted by alphacenturi
Thanks Soficrow for this thread, it can be pretty hard in this country to berate Paul and and his party for fear of people looking at you like you have 2 heads.
What is disturbing though, is that, the threat they have always alloted to the opposition, (that they are in cahoots with the U.S.) is BS and furthermore they themselves have once again denied the Canadian people of the truth. This is defintely calling the pot black when it comes to hidden agendas.
Originally posted by Gools
Take a look at the leadership of the G8 right now. Italy has scandal ridden Berlusconi. France is in deep trouble with innefective leadership. Britain has Blair, the US has Bush, Australia has Howard. We have Martin's scandal ridden government, etc.
A real crisis of leadership all around with apathetic populations. Sadly, the corporate plutocracy is well entrenched and they're getting their way with us.
Originally posted by soficrow
In Canada, the Liberals suck, the Conservatives are worse - and the NDP is not a player. What can be done?
Majic's Political Easter Egg: Be the first to post the year in which the Federal Militia Act (which created a Canadian army) was passed in this thread and send Majic a U2U with a link to your post, and you will be awarded 500 PTS points.
[edit on 7/15/2006 by Majic]
Originally posted by JacKatMtn
1868 -The first Federal Militia Act is passed, creating a Canadian army.