Liberal MP says Toews got what he deserved

The over-the-top rhetoric in Ottawa continued all stemming from Safety Minister Vic Toews’ comments about child pornographers and his divorce documents being put online via a Twitter account linked to a House of Commons IP address:

Liberal MP Wayne Easter had this to say:

“I think – I think the – look, the way that Vic Toews went on in responsing to the questions that you’re either on his side or you’re on the side of the pedophiles is – was very inappropriate.  And so there was an immediate reaction and it came out on the internet.  And so, yes, in a way it is deserved.  If you’re going to – if you’re going to attack people the way that Vic Toews attacked people, then some of that’s going to come back at you, there’s no question about that.” (see here)

Then this morning Minister John Baird jumped-the-gun and directly accused the NDP of “being caught in a nasty, dirty internet trick”. (see video here)

I’m thinking it’s time for all the parties to turn it down a few degrees as none are looking good in this mess.

Advertisements

22 Responses to “Liberal MP says Toews got what he deserved”

  1. jmw Says:

    I think this situation is a classic example where there is no accountability for behaviour in the House of Commons. Literally, it is a free-for-all and amounts to a school yard scrap.
    So Vic Toews offended someone by his over the top comment on “….your on the side of pornographers”. Exploitation of children is a pretty emotional subject that has been dragged out in the H of C for years with few results.
    Clearly, however, Wayne Easter has the integrity and moral compass of algae to suggest that Vic Toews deserved a public invasion of private information. What an a–!!

  2. Ed Says:

    Easter has always been a viscious twit. Is he related to Justin?

  3. Relayer Says:

    I’m a 55 yr old gun owning, card-carrying CPC member, and as far as I’m concerned, Toews deserves everything he gets. So does anyone who thinks it’s appropriate to lie to and spy on citizens; I hope they start in on Nicholson and Clement next.
    They either withdraw this odious Bill or I’m done with them.

  4. Liz J Says:

    Doorknob Easter, a real knob, again proving himself to be a true arsehole. Couldn’t be bothered with anything he has to say on any subject as he sits in the rear of the HOC with his Liberal rump party trying to look and sound important.

  5. jmw Says:

    Relayer,
    I totally support your position that it is untenable for the gov’t. to spy on it’s citizens. However, the Conservatives are willing to take input on the bill and it will not proceed in it’s present format. Personally, I think it needs to be worded to target child pornographers, not everyday citizens and I believe that is the end that the Conservatives want as well, despite the spin from the Opposition. Otherwise, it’s like the gun registry all over again!
    Good intent –bad wording.

    • Pissedoff Says:

      Problem is they didn’t say they were willing before loudmouth Toews sounded off. I am with relayer I hope they start on Baird next.

      TVOR calling people liars doesn’t make people like the liberals in blue any better, just makes you sound even more like the real liberals. Have you read the WHOLE bill? I doubt it.

      • wilson Says:

        ”….Harper made the decision to send the bill to the public safety committee after his return from China on Sunday morning, but that was only made public Wednesday…..”

        ‘Progressives’ are vicious,
        I hope the moron who went on the twitter attack get busted and fired.

        • Pissedoff Says:

          Still doesn’t excuse Toews calling me a pedophile then having Baird jump in like he did. Harper had better kill this bill.

    • Relayer Says:

      Bad intent, misleading wording- they simply reprinted the Bill with the “protecting children” thing in the short title alone. That’s it- nowhere else does the Bill mention child porn, pedophiles- nothing. It’s obvious this Bill was intended to cast a far, far wider net than merely pedophiles.

  6. TVOR Says:

    To Relayer are you really a card carrying CPC member? I doubt it very much. Have you really looked at this bill (the WHOLE bill ), again I doubt it very much. You do not like Toews, you do not like Nicholson and you do not like Clement. Me thinks you are missing your dear leader comrade Jack Layton.

    • Relayer Says:

      My 5 year membership expires Feb.28 2014, and I’m a sustaining donor. I was a member of the Reform Party, too. This Bill isn’t just the worst blunder the CPC has ever made, it’s unnecessary. If gov’t was serious about child porn, they could commit to large, dedicated budgets for the problem for those police forces dealing with it. They could severely increase the prison terms for convicted offenders. That’s just off the top of my head- no, this Bill was meant for something a lot larger than simply catching kiddie diddlers. The utter lack of any mention of children other than in the Short Title speaks volumes.
      Unless C-30 is withdrawn, never to see the light of day again, I’m predicting a Conservative minority gov’t next election. If they’re lucky.

      I despise Layton, and the entire NDP except for Hyer and Rafferty, who recently displayed a spine on behalf of their constituents.

  7. Joanne (BLY) Says:

    Sadly the whole thing just fuels voter cynicism. No one comes away from this looking virtuous..

  8. Alain Says:

    I remain opposed the bill as it stands, since I have witnessed abuse upon abuse every time those in authority are able to carry out warrantless searches. Anyone in doubt should see how law-abiding gun owners and farmers have been treated. Their most basic rights have been violated over and over again. I do wonder where all the consensus media and leftist were while this was going on. Experience has taught me that government and authorities must never be allowed unrestricted freedom when dealing with their own citizens, as it always results in the trampling of freedom of citizens. Does this mean I support the be nice to criminals ideology? The answer is no. Does this mean that I find what was done to Minister Toews acceptable? Again the answer is no. I expect better behaviour from Parliament, since it is possible to object to the bill without descending into the gutter.

  9. Durward Says:

    I don’t care what MP or party, if you seek to limit or sidestep our constitutional rights then you don’t deserve to be in Parliament.
    I expect it from the socialists, but not the party I invested in both monetarily and with my vote for so many yrs.
    There is only one thing that separates us from a tyranny and that’s the constitution, or what’s left of it after the introduction of the freakin charter by the “Liberals” “progressives” or socialists, call um what you want it all amounts to the same socialist BS.
    Why were property rights taken out of our platform?!
    That’s the question I still want answered.

  10. Paul Says:

    Chill people. The Conservatives have already said the bill will be reviewed.
    This from a card carrying/non gun carrying member of the CPC.

    Only a moron (Relayer) would say anyone deserves vicious personal postings on the internet.
    It puts them on the same level as the ********* that did it.

    Intolerance like yours seems more a Liberal/NDP characteristic Relayer.
    No party will govern exactly how you want, deal with it in a little more mature manner.

    • Jimmy Says:

      Keep it nice Paul. Relayer has just as much as right to his opinion as you.

      personally I am sick and ********* tired of the lack of respect on this and other blue boards.

      It’s past time for the owner/mod to take back control

  11. Barbara Says:

    Since I don’t like Wayne Easter, or the way he has handled himself over the years, I guess he would be all for somebody starting a twitter account to post all the personal details of his life.

  12. Roy Says:

    paul maybe its Justin Trudeu in disgused trying to change the subject

  13. taxpayer Says:

    Hmmmm, I see the same CPC supporter slagging going on “…you’re a Lib in disguise”, when a CPC supporter critiques the CPC for being boneheaded. Bite it. I read the Bill, you can too at: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=5375610

    First question: why change the name from; the Investigating and Preventing Criminal Electronic Communications Act? To do so and then call it (sic) the anti-kiddy-porn bill actually masks it’s real intentions and get it passed (at least in voter’s eyes) more easily.

    Second question; why is the Competition Bureau one of agencies allowed to apply to snoop under this legislation? On top of that why are “foreign” agencies/operatives also included as ones allowed to snoop?

    From what I read, I didn’t see any reference to kiddy porn/child molestation anywhere in the bill.

    PURPOSE

    OBJET DE LA LOI

    Purpose

    3. 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 telecommunications service providers to provide subscriber and other information, without unreasonably impairing the privacy of individ-uals, the provision of telecommunications services to Canadians or the competitiveness of the Canadian telecommunications industry.

    To me, a subscriber to internet service, I will be forced to pay for the infrastructure that will have the ability to “spy” on me. Basically enlisting Bell, Rogers, Shaw and other service providers to equip themselves with the latest in technology similar to CSIS. So that they can be compelled to do the jobs that police services, CSIS themselves and other government agencies do without those same agencies having to spend more money. Not quite so for CSIS.

    If anyone has an inkling as to what “data mining” software can do, it can be built in and your service provider can “help” law enforcement/national security to do their jobs. Your bank branch already does so and reports to FINTRAC without having to tell you. The CRA now want’s the bank transit and account number of recipient’s depository accounts for T5 reported income. Say “something hurtful” over the internet soon and you get a visit from the HRC.

    Solution: buy and install encryption software and get your recipient’s to use it to communicate business or personally, including your kids. Want to surf annonymously, get TOR or use another proxy server. Your friendly MSM reporters use TOR; https://www.torproject.org/

    All the “real” criminals already do this, so why do we need this legislation – should be the real question.

    What this fuss has brought out is the fact that nobody trusts the unelected employees of government with our privacy, at any level. You now “fear” your government agencies and institutions, rather than they “serve” your best interests.

  14. taxpayer Says:

    AND who would trust the “unelected’ bureaucracy if:

    Section 33 of Bill C30 – “The Minister may designate persons or
    classes of persons as inspectors for the purposes of the administration
    and enforcement of this Act.”

    Section 34 -Inspectors may “enter any place owned by, or under the control
    of, any telecommunications service provider in which the inspector has
    reasonable grounds to believe there is any document, information,
    transmission apparatus, telecommunications facility or any other thing
    to which this Act applies.”

    Said inspector may “examine any document, information
    or thing found in the place and open or cause to be opened any container
    or other thing.” Inspectors may also “use, or cause to be used, any
    computer system in the place to search and examine any information
    contained in or available to the system.”

    The Cons are stupid if they think this legislation is what we need to stop kiddy-porn. I for one will not accept the “don’t worry be happy and don’t crap on my beloved Conservatives, or you’re one of “them”, rhetoric.

    The same unelected clowns gave us the LGR and fought tooth and nail to rescind it. This legislation was “sold” to Vic, who in his heart seems to believe his bureaucrats constructed “good law”. Well, they didn’t and these same skunks made him look bad doing so.

  15. Liberal staffer found behind anti-Toews Twitter account « BC Blue: One BC Conservative's view on it all… Says:

    […] John Baird has also apologized to the NDP for his dumb accusation prior to an investigation being […]


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: