• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch

G20 protesters regroup in Montreal Thursday:

MONTREAL - Marching behind a large banner that proclaimed "the real vandals are the chiefs of state," more than 750 Montrealers marched northward along St. Laurent Blvd.

At 1:10 p.m. Thursday they had reached the corner of Prince Arthur St., chanting slogans and carrying signs protesting what organizers had called the "repressive apparatus" for G-20 summit in Toronto.

They had not disclosed their protest route and were accompanied at a distance by Montreal police, some on bicycles, some on foot, with police cruisers.
The march convened for noon at the Carré St. Louis, near the Sherbrooke métro station.
No route or destination were disclosed beforehand.

(article continues)

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/protesters+regroup+Montreal/3223971/story.html#ixzz0sSSBG3Sm
              (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)
 
A lot of left-wingers surprisingly defending the violent protesters in the CBC comments.

I am all for people protesting, but as soon as they start rioting I think the Police should have far more liberties to start laying the smack down. 

That way you wouldn't have 1,000 cops vs 1,000 violent protesters and 10,000 curious onlookers, but 1,000 cops and 10,000 curious onlookers vs the 1,000 violent protesters because they would hopefully not allow the dinks to do anything bad for fear of the MGs opening up.
 
Rogo said:
I hope they didn't dare damage anything on that memorial.

It will need a darn good scrubbing, that's for sure!

Petamocto said:
A lot of left-wingers surprisingly defending the violent protesters in the CBC comments.

Rex Murphy of the CBC had this to say, before it went down. To refresh my memory, I read what Rex had to say. This time, after the fact:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OusdsPv5XwA


Rex Murphy

May 26, 2010

Summits are useless, expensive, and potentially dangerous anachronisms.

Let's take the Toronto summit. No-one from the general public will be meeting with the world leaders --- summits are not for mingling. No walk-abouts a la the Royals.

Why, then, are they meeting in the middle of Canada's most populous city when the very idea of meeting, interacting with, or making a presentation to - any of the city's population is absolutely impossible? They could meet on the Funks - remote and un-crowded even by Newfoundland standards - and see more people.

Once inside the summit venue the leaders - and their insanely bloated retinues - will be almost antiseptically sealed off from every other bit of Toronto outside their fortified meeting rooms and security-proofed hotels. Effectively, they will come to Toronto, stay behind a shield of impassable security, merely to talk to leaders most of whom they have already met. It makes zero sense.

There's another objection. In older, less cynical days, the leaders of the world enjoyed some genuine prestige. There was a sense that a city was receiving "an honour" when the leaders from other countries visited. Not now. In a world rocked with recession, Europe on the brink, terrorism and the threat of terrorism an always present obbligato, there is not only no thrill to leaders visiting - in some cases there is palpable resentment.

World leaders are neither revered nor even, in most cases, seen as interesting. Why do you think these summits so frequently drag in poor tired old Bono - except to get a little second-hand celebrity sauce for an otherwise very flat meal?

Finally, from Seattle to Quebec City to Toronto next month, who really "owns" these summits? With the leaders invisible under their security blankets, they belong to the protestors. Summits are the high holy days, the carnival of ritual protest and vacuous street theatre. You can't hold a global anything these days, even a joyful event like the Olympics, without the tired kabuki of protest groups jamming the streets, shouting their impenetrable litany of anti-everything, accompanied, of course, by the usual band of black masked pseudo-anarchists allergic to Starbucks and thirsty for the two-day fame a little provocation or a lot of violence can bring them. The leaders own the meetings; the protestors own the cameras.

Finally, I know we're in the age of large numbers, but can anyone seriously rationalize spending close to a billion dollars - a billion - to hold a pair of meetings? And that's just for the security! This one consideration in itself is obscene. It'll only cost a billion dollars for 20 people to meet for a few of days, because of where they meet. Face time, as the ugly phrase has it, is valuable, but it's not worth a billion dollars, nor a fraction of it, in the middle of a recession.

Meet in the White House, or in a resort, or (if space is a consideration) at Al Gore's house - anywhere but in a 21st century downtown of a modern city, where security suffocates the meeting and protestors are given the most expensive magnifying glass the world has even known.

For The National, I'm Rex Murphy.
 
mariomike said:
Summits are the high holy days, the carnival of ritual protest and vacuous street theatre. You can't hold a global anything these days, even a joyful event like the Olympics, without the tired kabuki of protest groups jamming the streets, shouting their impenetrable litany of anti-everything, accompanied, of course, by the usual band of black masked pseudo-anarchists allergic to Starbucks and thirsty for the two-day fame a little provocation or a lot of violence can bring them. The leaders own the meetings; the protestors own the cameras.

:nod:
 
Rex Murphy is one of the few things I very much like about the CBC.... he always tells it like it is, and never fails to raise excellent points to ponder.
:salute:

Also, Thanks to both Container and Wonderbread for reminding me why I like this site so much.  Two people having Reasonable informed and respectful discussion on here. 

I look forward to reading this thread further as it continues to evolve and stimulate some interesting debate.  :salute:
 
Can anybody confirm if that dirt bag on the memorial is the same one looking sad and sullen in the police arrest photos? The guy who is nearly naked?
 
By blowing out the above photo to 200%. I see he is sporting the same ring on the same finger in  other photos on the thread. Seems to be the same guy.
 
ArmyRick said:
Can anybody confirm if that dirt bag on the memorial is the same one looking sad and sullen in the police arrest photos? The guy who is nearly naked?

I asked that too, looks exactly like him.
 
George Wallace said:
............the CLAC, Montreal's Anti-Capitalist Convergence group, which said Monday that only 125 of its 450 members who had taken buses to Toronto had returned.

...........................................

The CLAC describes itself as an umbrella group involved in a number of different issues -- including rights for immigrants and women, in addition to its anti-capitalist agenda.

It has no problem with the so-called Black Bloc protest tactics, calling it a legitimate form of protest, which it says mainly targets "multi-national" companies and "symbols of capitalism."

The protest tactic sees people using black clothing to blend into larger crowds and, in many cases, taking advantage of that anonymity to escape arrest for vandalism.

"We respect a diversity of tactics. People are angry, particularly in the context of an event like that," said Mathieu Francoeur, another CLAC member.

"For us it's vandalism against certain institutions . . . it's symbolic and doesn't compare with violence in general in society."

But organizers for the Quebec-based group said they were surprised by the targeting of French-speaking protesters.

One member who was detained on Sunday said she and two other Quebecers driving along College Street were stopped only because they had a Quebec licence plate.

Camille, a slight redhead who refused to give her last name, said police then rifled through her possessions and found some black clothing.

She also had a lawyer's telephone number scrawled on her arm and an anarchist book in the car.

She said she was held for nearly 10 hours without being allowed to make a phone call, and was crammed into a cell with other women almost entirely from Quebec.

"They showed us a report by accident that said they arrested us because we had Quebec licence plates and a black T-shirt," said the university student.

She drove overnight to get out of Toronto after spending Sunday in detention.

"We just wanted to get the hell out of there," she said.


....................................................................................

The CLAC organizers deflected allegations that people affiliated with their group were in large part responsible for the damage.

The CLAC says about 1,000 members went in Toronto, but were immediately targeted as soon as their buses pulled into the city on Friday.

"Anyone who had the protester look," Francoeur said.

"There was institutionalized profiling, and we figured it might happen, but we never thought politicians would also give police carte blanche to do as they pleased."

The CLAC had spent months organizing trips to Toronto to protest the G20.

...........................................................................................

The Montreal protest group is planning to hold a demonstration on Thursday to denounce police handling of the G20 protests.




LINK

Let's see?  Lawyer's phone number already written on arm.  Black clothing in car.  Anarchist literature in car.  Quebec plates on car, and info that the CLAC are coming in force in buses and cars from Quebec.  A LEO would be pretty thick not to put two and two together here lady. 

At least she was smart enough to "get out of Dodge" as soon as she was released.

I think that the MSM are siding with the perpetrators of the violence, and not giving the Police and other agencies the credit that they are due for stopping much more of the violence from taking place through good intelligence on the groups like CLAC and SOAR and arresting people stupid enough to think that bringing anarchist literature, black clothing and items to be used in the commissioning of violent acts on their arrival in Toronto.  I am sure that 1,000 activists from Montreal and Quebec would have wrecked even more havoc on Toronto, had they not been arrested/detained. 

Now, I hope that the stupid activists who were dumb enough to show up at the Detention Centre, identified and snatched by the police, are all brought to justice and sued by the banks and businesses that they attacked and looted, as well as the private and public property that they trashed.
 
ArmyRick said:
Can anybody confirm if that dirt bag on the memorial is the same one looking sad and sullen in the police arrest photos? The guy who is nearly naked?

As you view the numerous sites for photos and video, you will find this guy showing up everywhere, from fully clothed to completely naked.  I would suspect that he is a homeless person with a serious psychological problem who has fallen through the cracks of the Social System and isn't "Institutionalized" as he would appear to need.
 
Wonderbread said:
I understand that both cops and soldiers are enforcers of government policy; the former at home, the latter abroad. 

I am sorry Wonderbread, but you understand wrong.

First of all, the cops are enforcers of the duly enacted criminal and penal laws of the country only. They have no business enforcing policies, which are not binding on citizens. A country where "policies" are enforced by cops is a police state.

As for the military, we do not enforce "policy" either. We defend the integrity of the country from attacks by foreign powers: in other terms, Canada's sovereignty, and we protect canadian interests abroad as lawfully ordered. This is why for instance, Canada has a foreign policy on the middle east, which the military does not enforce, while after the Israel foray into Lebanon a few years ago, the military assisted the government's efforts at repatriating Canadians from Lebanon: the safety of Canadian citizens abroad being a Canadian Interest. 
 
Choice of terms aside- I believe Wonderbread was showing a similarity in the Raison d'être of the Police and the Military. Which at its most base form is the protection of people (in the case of Canadian Interests being maintaining Canadian citizens for the miltary side as you provided about Lebanon) and property (also Canadian Interests). While enforcement is a tool it is not the entire reason for existence.

Wouldnt you agree?

As for the most recent article provided by George Wallace (thank you) I am always surprised by anti-capitalists who drive cars. Maybe a Lada but anything else?

In the end I believe it is good for the public to ask questions and get answers about what the police did during the protests. I like free society where we can ask- it reminds me of why I am Canadian in more than name. But it is important to also be open to the answers.

I have no doubt there will be mistakes identified from the summit. But keeping anarchist dipsticks who dont believe in protesting without violence out shouldnt be one of them. I really do believe that todays "protester" shames the protesters of the civil rights movements. That must be why they cant get my support. And Im a moderate.
 
Container said:
Choice of terms aside- I believe Wonderbread was showing a similarity in the Raison d'être of the Police and the Military. Which at its most base form is the protection of people (in the case of Canadian Interests being maintaining Canadian citizens for the miltary side as you provided about Lebanon) and property (also Canadian Interests). While enforcement is a tool it is not the entire reason for existence.

Wouldnt you agree?

I don't know if this discussion belongs here Container, but I cannot agree with your statement. First, choice of terms does matter.

While its been said that "the police protects us from the enemy within, while the armed forces protect form the enemy without", it is not the same type of enemy or even interest that is at issue. One great difference is that the police needs laws to enforce and breach of those laws before it can act. This is so because any police action is to some extent an intrusion into the sphere of personal interest of the citizen. This is why the police presence is kept to the required level. (It would not do to have a 500 strong police force in small 10K habitants town with just about no crime to speak of, as it creates an atmosphere of being watched - spied on - without cause). The military, which does not intrude into the people's private sphere, do not need an "enemy" of the moment to justify their existence: the mere fact that war remains possible and the maintenance of critical warfighting knowledge require training is sufficient.

For instance, you mention property as an interest. It may be so for an individual, but not for the state as a state. It is a personal interest in one's property that you protect as a police officer. This is why the laws enforced by police are aimed at the individual's deportment. But the military protects the state's interest, not the individual's. Thus, protection of private property is not a military concern, except in the exceptional circumstances where the civil authorities (the police) asks for assistance which is then carried out in the same lawful manner as police conduct.

Similarly, the protection of Canadian citizens abroad, as in the Lebanese example I cited, is not carried out by the state or military on an individual citizen's interest basis but on a state level. A Canadian arrested in a foreign country, even on a flimsy basis, does not trigger the "protection of Canadian citizens abroad" interest, not even the mere kidnapping of a Canadian citizen abroad (unless kidnapped by the foreign state). It is the collective interest that must be triggered, such as the one resulting from external events affecting Canadian abroad, such as natural disaster, wars, insurrections, etc. that catch Canadian "off-guard" so to speak, and exceed the foreign state's capacity to ensure the full protection of the Canadian citizen.

This as you can see can lead to a nice philosophical discussion, but not one that belongs here.
 
Lex Parsimoniae said:
mariomike said:
"Rex Murphy says...."
Summits are the high holy days, the carnival of ritual protest and vacuous street theatre
:nod:
Some people are deeply sensitive about quotes being falsely attributed  ;)
 
That was just me getting a little cranky in my old age, Journeyman. Which is why I try to stick to old movies on TV, rather than the local news.  :)
Sorry about the crack. Too late now to remove it.  :-[
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
I am sorry Wonderbread, but you understand wrong.

Fair enough.  I really didn't intend to sidetrack this discussion on the difference between the police and the military.

The purpose of that comment was to show that I'm usually pretty sympathetic to the police.  Even if you were to remove that particular sentence from my post, my argument still stands.
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
...
While its been said that "the police protects us from the enemy within, while the armed forces protect form the enemy without", ... This as you can see can lead to a nice philosophical discussion, but not one that belongs here.

- I'm temped, though...  Let us remember Sir Robert Peel's Principals of Policing:

Principles of policing:

  1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
  2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
  3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
  4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
  5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
  6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
  7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
  8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
  9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

- Note: "The police are the public and the public are the police." In other words, police fight crime full time, the rest of us part time: by protecting ourselves and those we are responsible for by self-defence and defence of property within the law.  Police protect society, as individuals, we protect ourselves.  Like it or not, in most cases you call 9-1-1 for clean-up. 

 
I just came across this video of a looter being stopped...................  ;D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w1n5KthCmY
 
Larkvall said:
I just came across this video of a looter being stopped...................  ;D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w1n5KthCmY

Notice that the guy he bumps into exiting the Bell Store almost enters and then stops when he sees the thief being held down.
 
George Wallace said:
Notice that the guy he bumps into exiting the Bell Store almost enters and then stops when he sees the thief being held down.

Works in a bank when not taking down looters:
http://torontoist.com/2010/07/roger_reis_g20_bell_store_looter_tackler.php

The monument squatter looks like he is trying to put out a fire started by a guy wearing a white hoodie around the 2:25 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi-Q11MKx1g

( Around the 2:00 mark, and after, there looks to be bald-headed guy in a dark shirt passing stuff in from the passenger side at 2:23. You can see that same guy carrying some bottles in his left hand at 0:39, with a big yellow sign in his right hand.  )

Canadian Press:
"McGuinty regrets confusion over secret G20 law:  TORONTO - Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty admits he could have done a better job of dispelling widespread confusion about police powers during the explosive G20 protests in Toronto, but insists he doesn't owe anyone an apology.":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100702/national/g20_secret_law

"Joint lawsuit planned for G20 arresteesOverwhelmed with calls, Civil Liberties Association is working on suing police forces: Overwhelmed with calls, Civil Liberties Association is working on suing police forces":
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/830747--joint-lawsuit-planned-for-g20-arrestees?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

"TTC worker caught in G20 police sweep: Man arrested and held 36 hours despite uniform, identification":
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/830858--ttc-worker-caught-in-g20-police-sweep?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

"Angry merchants ask: Why did G20 protesters attack us?: Vandals attacked their stores during the G20 summit. Now, Yonge St.’s small merchants want to know, ‘Why us?’":
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/831506--angry-merchants-ask-why-did-g20-protesters-attack-us

National Post:
"[TORONTO – Jul. 1, 2010] – Canadians and Torontonians think the federal government should be responsible for compensating the businesses that were negatively affected during the G20 summit in the country's largest city, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.":
http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/2010.07.01_Summits_CAN.pdf

"G20 debates a friendship in the breaking: Talking politics creates a rift in relationships":
http://www.thestar.com/living/article/831059--g20-debates-a-friendship-in-the-breaking


 
Back
Top