BELL SYMPATICO USERS BEWARE !
Jump to Page:
< Previous [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ]
Quote:
Originally posted by Big Vee
Quote:
Originally posted by DesiTiger
Oh Stop Overreacting!
As with everything else, this too shall pass. (no pun intended)
Hey, you can never be too cautious.
I am almost sure if they had forums such as this one during the big war, they would have said the same thing of Income Tax!
BV
Touche
Here are some funny quotes on Income Tax
Mark Twain
The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.
Will Rogers
It is a good thing that we do not get as much government as we pay for.
Arthur Godfrey
I am proud to be paying taxes in the United States. The only thing is I could be just as proud for half of the money.
Albert Einstein
[on filing for tax returns] This is too difficult for a mathematician. It takes a philosopher.
John S. Coleman
The point to remember is that what the government gives it must first take away.
Herman Wouk
Income tax returns are the most imaginative fiction being written today.
Dr. Laurence J. Peter
America is a land of taxation that was founded to avoid taxation.
Milton Friedman
Congress can raise taxes because it can persuade a sizable fraction of the populace that somebody else will pay.
John Maynard Keynes
The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that carries any reward.
Will Rogers
The difference between death and taxes is death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft - Which end of the stick do you want today?
Location: Canada-Glorious and Free
Posted on: 05-07-06 10:40:45
The privacy commisioner, Jennifer Stoddart is investigating if the CIA and other security agencies have any financial information on Canadians. Her powers come from the House of Commons and the Senate. One of the few posts in Ottawa that gets mandated by both Houses.
While this investigation is focused on financial matters, what she covers here will apply to Internet and other breaches of privacy. This is what she had to say in the last report she released on this matter:-
"We must stand on guard against state access to the data banks of the corporate world. Fears of terrorist attacks or impending pandemics provide superficially attractive justifications for intrusive powers, but the real need for these powers is often not apparent."
SUPERFICIALLY ATTRACTIVE JUSTIFICATION is my new buzzword.
"We are gravely concerned that information gathered for private or commercial reasons is finding its way into government hands. This amounts to a blurring of the public and private sectors, leading to the potential use of private sector companies as agents of the state, often without the safeguards that are elemental in a democracy."
Most people think voting when you say democracy. But let it be known that one of the pillars that allow free vote is privacy and freedom. While this concept maybe beyond most people, it is incumbent upon those that understand the risks posed by this legislation to act and block it.
BV
This is not specific to the bell sympatico case. I saw the same kind of conversations in other forums about the NSA wiretap and the SWIFT issues that were recently highlighted in the USA. Whenever someone says "what do you have to fear if you have nothing to hide" I remember the following quote. “If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him” Cardinal Richelieu.... It is not something which directly co-relates with the question unless one removes the assumption that the material collected by the parties involved will not be intentionally or unintentionally misused.
What do i have to hide ???
Maybe my name ????????????
Can the ones who condone the collection and use of personal info by agencies please explain what one is doing wrong by having a particular name ???
Maybe they are "hiding" something in their name ????????
Going by the "cautious approach" that is seen by many as a means to curb "terrorism", these people shouldn't be affected at all........
Why should they need to worry about anything ???..... Shouldn't they be able to go on with their "normal lives" without having to face any "inconveniences" ?
Can someone please explain ???????
Excerpts.......
(link below)
"United Arab Emirates - Money transfer agencies have delayed or blocked thousands of cash deliveries on suspicion of terrorist connections simply because senders or recipients have names like Mohammed or Ahmed, company officials said.
In one example, an Indian driver here said Western Union prevented him from sending $120 to a friend at home last month because the recipient's name was Mohammed.
In a similar case, Pakistani Qadir Khan said Western Union blocked his attempt this month to wire money to his brother Mohammed for a cataract operation.
"Every Mohammed is a terrorist now?" Khan asked.
One Western Union clerk said about 300 money transfers from a single Dubai franchise were blocked or delayed each day — none of which has turned up a terrorist link
In one case, a couple in Sacramento, Calif. was thwarted from purchasing a treadmill on a financing plan, simply because the husband's first name was Hussein, Sinnar said in an e-mail interview.
"The Treasury program interferes with even the most innocent transactions," Saylor said. "Just because Ahmed is a common name on their list, everyone with that name is suddenly stuck." "
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060706/ap_on_bi_ge/emirates_muslim_money" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060706/ap_on_bi_ge/emirates_muslim_money</a>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I want the cultures of all the lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible.
But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any.
Location: Canada-Glorious and Free
Posted on: 07-07-06 10:31:21
I am glad to see that there are other desis who appreciate the seriousness of this issue.
BV
Quote:
Originally posted by mails4sagar
What do i have to hide ???
Maybe my name ????????????
Can the ones who condone the collection and use of personal info by agencies please explain what one is doing wrong by having a particular name ???
Maybe they are "hiding" something in their name ????????
Going by the "cautious approach" that is seen by many as a means to curb "terrorism", these people shouldn't be affected at all........
Why should they need to worry about anything ???..... Shouldn't they be able to go on with their "normal lives" without having to face any "inconveniences" ?
Can someone please explain ???????
How do you feel about being stopped at the airport due to the color of your skin? It happens...but to tell you the truth...if my wife and kids were travelling in the plane...I would not mind. Its a sign of the times we live in.
If a system 'democracy'(in this case) is nothing but an ideal set in stone...it will be only as good or bad as any other dogma. If it does not take into account the prevailing world situation...it may be on the loosing side of the battle against its enemies(who are not bound by its laws and ideals).
Ultimately self-interest reigns supreme. Thus, sometimes one has to choose amongst the lesser evil(collateral damage). In a perfect world, when all of us learn to get along, there will not be a need to.
Then we'll all gree with you Big Vee
. Its good that there are voices like yours though...helping in keeping the balance in the force .-----------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended Services- Servicedomino.com
http://www.servicedomino.com
Quote:
Originally posted by jake3d
How do you feel about being stopped at the airport due to the color of your skin? It happens...but to tell you the truth...if my wife and kids were travelling in the plane...I would not mind. Its a sign of the times we live in.
Doesn't it boil down to perspective? I wouldn't mind as well if my wife and kids were on the plane. However, if my wife was the one always getting stopped and harassed because of her skin color, I'd definately mind.
Since I can't have it both ways though, it would be one or the other. Unless circumstances were extremely dire (which in my opinion they're not right now in Canada at least), I'd prefer sweeping privacy legislation changes be avoided. If the govt. wants to snoop on the someone's internet usage, I'd rather they get a warrant issued by a judge who's reviewed the case rather than have blanket powers to check on whoever they like. There's potential for gross abuse there.
No easly answers to this one ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
Advertise Contact Us Privacy Policy and Terms of Usage FAQ Canadian Desi © 2001 Marg eSolutions Site designed, developed and maintained by Marg eSolutions Inc. |