warnings were given - canada headed a step closer to a police state

CruisnGrrl

Well-known member
Site Supporter
remember when doom and gloomers said that if harper was elected we would be headed towards a police state?

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/H...+anti+terror+powers+police/5361176/story.html


Our police haven't had these powers for 4 years... anyone notice a difference?

OTTAWA — Controversial clauses expanding the powers of police to combat terrorism are going to be reintroduced by the new Conservative majority government, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in an interview with CBC.


Harper said for the first time since the Tories took control of the House of Commons the government plans to bring back measures in the Anti-Terrorism Act that expired in 2007.


"We think those measures are necessary. We think they've been useful," Harper said of the expired parts of the act. "They're applied rarely, but there are times where they're needed."


The clauses were part of the act, introduced in 2001, and were required to be renewed every three years. They allowed for preventive detention of suspects for up to 72 hours, granted police the ability to arrest terrorism suspects without a warrant and enabled judges to compel witness to testify.


In 2007 the Opposition Liberals, led by Stephane Dion, blocked the continuation of the police powers. A small number of Grits, including former Liberal justice minister Irwin Cotler, abstained from the vote because they sided with the then-minority government.


Harper tired to reintroduce the measures at other points during his minority reign, but he was thwarted by parliamentary recesses.


In the interview Harper said Canada is still under the threat of terrorism. "The major threat is still Islamicism. There are other threats out there, but that is the one that I can tell you occupies the security apparatus most regularly," he said.


"As we've seen in Norway, terrorist threats can come out of the blue. It can come from something completely different, and there are other groups and individuals that if given the chance would engage in terrorism."


The sources of terrorism aren't necessarily from the Middle East, according to Harper.


"Threats exist all over the world. We've seen some recent bombings in Nigeria, domestic Nigerian terrorists," he said. Harper told the CBC that the government is keeping an active "eye on" homegrown terrorist threats as well.


Terrorist activity is included under the Criminal Code and includes conspiracy, attempt or threat to commit terrorism, being an accessory after the fact or counselling in relation to any such act.
 
your from trenton, so im guessing your in the air force.. and your upset that police have more power to combat terrorism!!

strange but okay.
 
Ahhh to be so young and naive once again, so flush with idealism...
[video=youtube;-7_a2wa2dd4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7_a2wa2dd4[/video]

Interesting stuff starts around 2:15...
[video=youtube;np_YMSUaE0g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_YMSUaE0g[/video]

Note the PC position at the end of this one after the Premier has his say...
[video]http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20080611/street_racing_law_080611?hub=TorontoNewHome[/video]
 
Last edited:
May be this season when Vancouver makes another cup run the police can kick a little more *** this time.
 
your from trenton, so im guessing your in the air force.. and your upset that police have more power to combat terrorism!!

strange but okay.

It might have more to do with the erosion of our civil liberties. Personally, I'd prefer to risk being blown up in a terrorist attack than to give the cops the power to summarily detain me without warrant.
 
your from trenton, so im guessing your in the air force.. and your upset that police have more power to combat terrorism!!

strange but okay.

It is not "upset because the police have more power"
It's more like "concern about the potential for abuse" ... who is going to police the police, anyway?
 
your from trenton, so im guessing your in the air force.. and your upset that police have more power to combat terrorism!!

strange but okay.

I don't find that strange. I think that few people understand what it means in the long term when we put safety before freedom. Taking away someone's freedom for 72 hours for the possible safety of many sounds like a good deal. No?
 
It might have more to do with the erosion of our civil liberties. Personally, I'd prefer to risk being blown up in a terrorist attack than to give the cops the power to summarily detain me without warrant.

+1

I take risks everyday of my life. The kind of risks I take in riding/driving alone are far higher and more likely to happen then a terrorist attack.

Here is a question; how would all of you feel if there existed technology that would allow a reliable accident-proof computer solution to do all the driving/ riding for you and for the safety of many the government would make it mandetory to use that? All you would do is punch in the address and press start or stop.

**the question above is in no direct relation to the topic. So please don't compare.
 
I liked it better when Canada was known as maple syrup drinkers and hockey superstars. Now it's being turned into USA's goon on the international war front and Bieber's roadies.

I don't like the Canada that is trying to become the 51st state. Yeah, man...Iraq hates snow, beavertails, the CN Tower, and the Jets coming back was the last straw - we're going to get anthraxed in retaliation, ohhhh shhhhhhhiiiiiiiii

Sod off, eh?
 
It might have more to do with the erosion of our civil liberties. Personally, I'd prefer to risk being blown up in a terrorist attack than to give the cops the power to summarily detain me without warrant.

+2 x 100
 
.. yet we continue to do business with the world's number one exporter of terrorism, and call this free trade.
 
I don't find that strange. I think that few people understand what it means in the long term when we put safety before freedom. Taking away someone's freedom for 72 hours for the possible safety of many sounds like a good deal. No?

[h=1]“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”[/h]
 
how is it that with all of the crap that went down at the g20 that the feds now think they need MORE powers? wasn't that bad enough?

the sundown clauses were put in for a reason. why should people buy into these chicken little arguments to justify loss of civil liberties?

ridiculous
 
I don't find that strange. I think that few people understand what it means in the long term when we put safety before freedom. Taking away someone's freedom for 72 hours for the possible safety of many sounds like a good deal. No?

until it is you who is the one facing the 72 hours of no freedom.
 
Yes, pretty ridiculous. Cause it is us Canadian Citizens that are causing the Terrorism, and it has nothing to do with letting immigrants come in from another country and work the system. </sarcasm>
 
Taking away someone's freedom for 72 hours for the possible safety of many sounds like a good deal. No?

No.

A thousand times no.

Never does trading liberty for security seem like a good idea. That's one of the things that seperates us from the bad guys.

Give me liberty or give me death. Not "give me a false sense of security and I'll trust you to do the right thing".
 
Remember when I posted this...?

"Here is my question to those of you that feel the G20 was a great travesty of justice. What are you going to do about it? Arguing with me is useless, and will not do anything to help your cause . What will you do?

Imagine you have convinced me. That I were to agree with every point you make. So what? What are you doing about it?

All I see is 21 pages of arguments, spanning January back to the summer. Useless.

Don't worry about who agrees, or disagrees with you. Go do something about it.

I'll bet you won't."

January 18, 2011

Done anything yet? No?





Didn't think so.
 
Yes, pretty ridiculous. Cause it is us Canadian Citizens that are causing the Terrorism, and it has nothing to do with letting immigrants come in from another country and work the system. </sarcasm>

WTF are you on about? Every Canadian citizen was an immigrant or progeny of immigrants. Take the xenophobia somewhere else.
 
No.

A thousand times no.

Never does trading liberty for security seem like a good idea. That's one of the things that seperates us from the bad guys.

Give me liberty or give me death. Not "give me a false sense of security and I'll trust you to do the right thing".

+1, I guess my comment made people think, which is a good thing. I for one would never want government security even if it came at no cost at all.
 

Back
Top Bottom