G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch

[The Bread Guy]

Your foil hat seems to be particularly clear in its direction, OS  ;D

 

[Michael OLeary]

Of course, it cannot be ruled out that the attack was carried out by agents provocateurs from within the state’s security apparatus.

It's got to be true, because that's how it works, ever since 31 August 1939, so sayeth Saint Godwin. patron saint of those who would accuse democracies of fascism.

 

[The Bread Guy]

You'll be glad to know that the Anarchisms Twitter feed has some good news for them:

Communications security equipment safely arrived in BC and in transit to Toronto    (posted) about 10 hours ago  via HootSuite 

They're also sharing a "protest zone map":

#G20, Toronto protest zone map http://bit.ly/aVAbZa (posted)  about 10 hours ago  via HootSuite 

Interested in security work?  Check this out on Kijiji:

.... Do you have what it takes to be part of the largest security event in Canadian history?
NOW HIRING: G8/G20 Summits Security Screening Positions $20-$24 per hour
Contemporary Security Canada ULC. (CSC) is now hiring qualified Security Guards for the upcoming G8/G20 Summit in the Greater Toronto Area.

Key Highlights

All positions are full time (12 hour shifts, 60 hour week and paid overtime)
Job terms range from June 15 to 28, 2010 (estimated)
Industry leading pay and completion bonus (Rate with bonus ranging from $20-$24/hour)
Accommodation, transportation, uniforms and most meals provided (some conditions apply)
Opportunity to work the largest security event in Canadian history ....

Meanwhile, Linda McCuaig bemoans the painting of all protesters with a broad brush:

If you're thinking they're just violent troublemakers, you've probably been listening too closely to the Harper government, which is hoping you'll succumb to its attempt to lump terrorists and peaceful protestors all together in one giant bin marked scary and anti-democratic .... It's sad that it needs to be noted that dissent is something worthy; that it used to be considered one of the cornerstones of democracy. John Stuart Mill, one of the giants of Western thought, argued in his classic text On Liberty that dissent is essential to freedom, partly because it challenges the prevailing dogma, which is often wrong.  Yet, rather than being treated as citizens exercising vital democratic rights, the dissenters who show up at the G20 will find themselves facing a phalanx of heavily armed police equipped with the latest assault toy: sound cannons that blast deafening noise of up to 143 decibels — well above the 85-decibel level considered safe for the human ear .... Last week Rex Murphy used his prominent spot on CBC TV to attack the G20 protestors as fame-seekers, “thirsty for the two-day fame a little provocation or a lot of violence can bring them.”  So, before they've even held up a placard, Murphy has maligned people who will have to risk tear gas and deafness to get a fraction of the airtime Murphy gets every week to bellow on behalf of the Establishment.

Note to Linda:  dissent =/= vandalism.  As for the "lump(ing of) terrorists and peaceful protestors all together in one giant bin marked scary and anti-democratic", the group's own words speak for themselves when it comes to how protesters will deal with the small number of the most violent provocateurs in their midst - lots in earlier posts in this thread (as well as some groups who clearly condemn violence and/or vandalism of private or public property) on that point.  Part of the solution, or part of the problem?

 

[The Bread Guy]

From the Globe & Mail - as usual, highlights mine:

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is gathering human rights monitors to attend the G20 protests in June. The group is looking for about 45-60 individuals to work in pairs throughout the week of June 21 through 27, 2010, for four hours a day. They will be assigned to follow protests and take notes on what occurs, with an eye to watching how demonstrators are treated by police. Volunteers don’t need any legal training, but must take a CCLA training session prior to the G20. They will drop their notes off at CCLA headquarters after every shift, says general counsel Nathalie DesRosier, so that the group can take legal action if needed. But finding the right volunteers is not always easy, she acknowledged. Monitors must be willing to walk along with the protests, risking arrest, pepper spray and sonic canon, and having to endure hours of endless chants. The monitors are also expected to be impartial, and can not be there because they want to take part in the demonstrations. “This means that if you are thinking of engaging in acts of civil disobedience, or if you think you may want to participate in the protest, you should not sign up to be a Monitor,” notes a release from the group. “You should also keep in mind that monitors may interact with the police, and there is a small chance of arrest, or being asked to testify in court. If you have personal reasons to be worried about interactions with the police, including outstanding arrest warrants or uncertain immigration status, you may not want to participate as a monitor.” ....

 

[Flavour Country]

(b) an act or omission, in or outside Canada,

(i) that is committed

(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and

(B) in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada, and

(ii) that intentionally

(A) causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,

(B) endangers a person’s life,

(C) causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,

(D) causes substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C), or

(E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),

I hope police, security and military personnel don't become terrorists during the protests.........

 

[PMedMoe]

I hope police, security and military personnel don't become terrorists during the protests.........

What?  ???

 

[Flavour Country]

sorry, I quoted the law defining terrorism in canada.
I should have been more clear.

 

[vonGarvin]

I hope police, security and military personnel don't become terrorists during the protests.........

Dude, you sure are in Flavour Country, let me tell you.
eace:


But really, this pisses me off.  Looking at "the man" as the cause, rather than that thin line that keeps us all safe.  Now, the military will have a side show role in all of this, but the police will be on the front lines, protecting our properties from damage.  If you have a problem with that, I don't really give a fuck, young buck.  Just obey the laws of our great land, and all will be well.

sorry, I quoted the law defining terrorism in canada.
I should have been more clear.

Oh, you could not have been more clear, dude.  We get it.  You don't want the cops to become terrorists.  Yeah, that's right, "the man".  Because every one of those police officers just love smashing skulls.  :

 

[PMedMoe]

sorry, I quoted the law defining terrorism in canada.
I should have been more clear.

Clearer than what?

 

[aesop081]

sorry, I quoted the law defining terrorism in canada.

Thanks. Us knuckle-draging military instruments of government oppression were too stupid to know that.

 

[Flavour Country]

Why is this exorbitant security necessary in the first place?
Surely the thousands of officers, private security, cameras, barricades, etc. aren't in place to protect "our properties from damage"

 

[PMedMoe]

Why is this exorbitant security necessary in the first place?
Surely the thousands of officers, private security, cameras, barricades, etc. aren't in place to protect "our properties from damage"

Got anything to back that up?  Or are you just here to spout off?

 

[Flavour Country]

you don't think the security planned for this summit is excessive?

Especially if its only purose is to stop the protesters from breaking windows.

 

[PuckChaser]

The security planned is to stop people from harming the leaders of the most powerful nations in the world... whackjobs that firebomb local branches of a bank will probably not think twice about throwing the same molotov cocktail at another human being. Preventing idiots from smashing windows just because they can in the name of "anarchy" is just a positive side effect.

 

[PMedMoe]

you don't think the security planned for this summit is excessive?

No, I don't.

Especially if its only purose is to stop the protesters from breaking windows.

Perhaps you should research your topic a little more thoroughly.

 

[vonGarvin]

you don't think the security planned for this summit is excessive?

Especially if its only purose (sic) is to stop the protesters from breaking windows.

No, I don't.
Think back to the so-called "Battle of Seattle"  Yes, that was 11 years ago; however, its effects are still being felt at meetings such as the G20 coming up.  World leaders from, well, around the world will be there.  Groups from all over are coming, and as stated in this very thread, some are coming not just to protest, but to wreak havoc.  I would offer that most coming have good intentions: protest what they see as something worthy of protest.

Now, for that minority who wish to wreak havoc, the police are there to keep order.  They do it in Montreal when the Habs win or lose various hockey games, and they will do it in Toronto. 

Now, I ask you, what do you think is the real reason behind all of this security?

 

[Flavour Country]

The security planned is to stop people from harming the leaders of the most powerful nations in the world...

World leaders from, well, around the world will be there. 

It's unfortunate that finance ministers and central bank governors have become world leaders.

That being said, my original point still stands. If the actions of police and security at past G20 protests are any indication of the way they will conduct themselves in June, by canadian standards the police are the terrorists.

Pointing to a small group of radicals burning down a bank Ottawa as legitimate reasoning for these ridiculous measures is absurd.

 

[vonGarvin]

It's unfortunate that finance ministers and central bank governors have become world leaders.

That being said, my original point still stands. If the actions of police and security at past G20 protests are any indication of the way they will conduct themselves in June, by canadian standards the police are the terrorists.

Pointing to a small group of radicals burning down a bank Ottawa as legitimate reasoning for these ridiculous measures is absurd.

OK, Flavour Country, I understand that you find it easy to villianise the actions of the police as being unprovoked and unnecessary.  And yes, "finance ministers" are in fact leaders.  (Not just the PMs, the Presidents and Monarchy are leaders.  There are a broad range of them).  And please don't minimise the effects of a deliberate criminal act of arson.  That act had nothing to do with the reason why these measures are being implemented: they were planned long before those criminals committed that act of arson. 
The police aren't terrorists.  They are acting within the law.  If there are activities that are criminal, and they see this, then they will deal with them. 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Folks, it's obvious what cloth Flavour Country is cut from. He's entitled to his opinion. Rebutt if you will, but let's not go around in circles. If there is nothing new to be said, just don't say it. Negate the sameness and move along by ignoring it.

Flavour Country,

You're opinion is yours. You must have known that it would only cause controversy here. You are far from the first to come here and poke someone with a stick, trying to get a reaction. You've stated your view, and thanks, but if you have nothing new to add, please don't expect us to engage you.

It may do you well to read the Site Guidelines, especially  for what we consider trolling, etc.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Flavour Country]

The police aren't terrorists.  They are acting within the law.  If there are activities that are criminal, and they see this, then they will deal with them. 

I agree that if protests turn to riots police must quell the violence and protect the public. It seems that the police are the ones inflicting most of the real violence however. I bet more protesters are injured by less than lethal munitions than police by... rocks? They're in riot gear and only a very small segment of idiots throw rocks at the police.

Anyway, tell me that police wont commit acts that intentionally injure, endanger lives and cause a serious risk to the the protesters health. The summit and the security measures to protect it fit the the criteria for a terrorist act in canada.


(

b) an act or omission, in or outside Canada,

(i) that is committed

(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and

(B) in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada, and

(ii) that intentionally

(A) causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,

(B) endangers a person’s life,

(C) causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,

(D) causes substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C), or

(E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),

Plus, police want nothing more than for a few idiots to throw some rocks so they can silence the masses.
Need you be reminded of the cops in quebec playing dressup to try and incite from violence from the protesters there?

recceguy,

I can assure you I'm not poking your members with a stick to get a reaction or "trolling", just stating an opinion.  One that while not held by many of your members, is held by a growing number of people.