Protesting while serving

[George Wallace]

So you suggest arresting hundreds or even thousands of people just because a few that committed some violent acts that hide among a crowd?

So a few commits violence, and hides the among a crowd of people, and wham, everyone is automatically considered violent, hence giving enough pretense to tear gas everyone?

You do know that "aiding and abetting" a criminal is against the Law?  It is a criminal act in itself to aid a criminal in any way.  It is also a criminal act to interfer with the course of a criminal investigation or the Law.  You do realize this? 

"Ignorance of the Law is no excuse."

 

[mellian]

Tried discussing this with Mellian a while ago in another thread...  :

She is among those who think that the authorities, and their subordinate organisations (Police, Military etc...) are invariably wrong, and the protesters are all "good, decent citizens" out to change society for the better.
She refuses to acknowledge that the majority of riots begin with a "peaceful" protest.

As I mentionned in that earlier discussion, Mellian will find adapting to the Military a difficult, if not impossible, task.

Assuming I fit into that archetype you created of me.

 

[MARS]

So a few commits violence, and hides the among a crowd of people, and wham, everyone is automatically considered violent, hence giving enough pretense to tear gas everyone?

Yes, exactly.  Tear gas is inherently indiscriminate.  So you LEAVE, so as not to be part of the problem.  That is all you can do, but it is what you MUST do.  Peaceful protest is over as soon as that first canister is fired and you have already admitted that it is near impossible to exercise control on these things start to disintegrate.  Time to leave.  What can you possibly hope to accomplish after that?

 

[mellian]

You do know that "aiding and abetting" a criminal is against the Law?  It is a criminal act in itself to aid a criminal in any way.  It is also a criminal act to interfer with the course of a criminal investigation or the Law.  You do realize this? 

"Ignorance of the Law is no excuse."

I do, and I also know how hard it is to arrest, investigate, and prosecute people at protests can be very resource and time extensive, including difficult to prove in court. How would  aiding and abetting a criminal by being part of a crowd that some few masked individuals that committed some violent acts hid in fly with the judge and jury? Then there is also more protests at the police station and court...

There only so much the police themselves can do given the circumstances. If they can't or do not arrest the culprits, are they also aiding and abetting or responsible for the violence in protests?

 

[SupersonicMax]

I do, and I also know how hard it is to arrest, investigate, and prosecute people at protests can be very resource and time extensive, including difficult to prove in court. How would  aiding and abetting a criminal by being part of a crowd that some few masked individuals that committed some violent acts hid in fly with the judge and jury? Then there is also more protests at the police station and court...

There only so much the police themselves can do given the circumstances. If they can't or do not arrest the culprits, are they also aiding and abetting or responsible for the violence in protests?

So if I go stealing something but I can't be proven guity for whatever reason, it makes it right?

Very strong moral fiber you are showing.

 

[X-mo-1979]

Aboriginal protests watched by CSIS

TORONTO - Canadian security officials kept a close watch on aboriginal rights protests across the country last summer, fearing violence and disruption, according to newly declassified government documents.

By National Post



TORONTO - Canadian security officials kept a close watch on aboriginal rights protests across the country last summer, fearing violence and disruption, according to newly declassified government documents.

Intelligence reports obtained by National Post reveal for the first time how the Canadian government tracked "ongoing and planned protests" by First Nations and their supporters from British Columbia to the Maritimes.

The Integrated Threat Assessment Centre, based at CSIS headquarters and made up of representatives of CSIS, the RCMP, Canadian Forces and other departments, circulated lists of protestors' plans in a series of intelligence reports.

The Government Operations Centre was also involved. It coordinates the national response to terrorist attacks, natural disasters and anything else that threatens the safety and security of Canadians or the integrity of Canada's critical infrastructure.

"A number of ongoing aboriginal protests and planned actions [are] set to take place over the summer of 2007," ITAC says in a report marked "secret," one of several released to the Post under the Access to Information Act.

"While the intention of these actions is to highlight grievances through peaceful protest, past protests have demonstrated that acts of violence or disruptions of critical infrastructure are possible."

The close government scrutiny of the events suggests that, following fatal stand-offs at Oka and Ipperwash, federal security agencies remained concerned about the potential for violence.

The intelligence reports show officials were particularly concerned about the National Day of Action held last June 29 to pressure Ottawa to address the grievances of Canada's aboriginal peoples. Some chiefs had called for road and rail blockades on that day.

Phil Fontaine, the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, said he was "disappointed but not surprised" to learn the federal government was monitoring the National Day of Action, and he wondered how much the surveillance and policing had cost.

"Whatever the cost, our view is that money would have been far better spent on providing the more than 100 First Nations communities with boil-water advisories with clean drinking water, alleviating poverty and settling our legitimate land claims," Chief Fontaine said. "Perhaps if that was the case, then there wouldn't be a need to hold a National Day of Action in the first place."

According to the documents, security officials were concerned "a small minority" of demonstrators could escalate the protests "as a means of attracting attention to their cause." Sympathetic environmentalists, "social issues extremists" and criminal groups could also exploit the protests, the reports say.

The reports identify planned protests in Toronto by the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, in Montreal by No One is Illegal and Block the Empire, and by anti-Olympic activists in Vancouver.

"In addition to these, there are also non-aboriginals who may oppose the aspirations of the aboriginals (local residents, cottagers, fishermen, etc. and also white supremacists and other extremists)," it adds. "These factors may cause instability and drive an individual protest in unpredictable ways."

ITAC began producing weekly threat assessments on the demonstrations last May. It began distributing daily intelligence updates the week of the National Day of Action. In total, 22 reports were produced.

In addition to the events tied to the day of action, the threat

assessment reports tracked four on-going aboriginal land protests in Caledonia, Deseronto, Grassy Narrows, and Cross Lake, Man.

"There are also a series of other potential causes for aboriginal protests over the summer of 2007. These include fishing and logging disputes, especially in the Maritimes; various development projects affecting aboriginal communities; and the preparations for the 2010 Winter Olympics."

The reports say the right to protest "is a cornerstone of Canada's democratic society. ITAC is concerned only where there is a threat of politically motivated violence, or where protests threaten the functioning of critical infrastructure."

Something for you to mull over.No one is going to change your mind on protesting.However I'll throw out this warning.If you are part of a peaceful protest that turn's sour,keep in mind you have already associated yourself with a certain protest group in past posts as your group.Suddenly you just assioated your self belonging to a protest group.And when as I highlighted CRIMINALS turn the protest into a riot and you find yourself biting dirt and being arrested,don't think you'll just be released from jail and that's it.When you get out you'll be dealing with your RSM for the charges against you.It will be noted on your file.See the military isnt going to care if your just a "innocent bystander".The fact is they will take 100% side of the LEO,and don't expect to get backed by the military 'casue you think you were right.fact is when you join no one gives a rats ass about your beliefs.Telling the RSM "the police were wrong,or about police brutality" isnt going to happen as most of those conversations will be one way anyway.

Im getting sick of your anti police sentiment.Can you please not join ARMD?

 

[mellian]

Yes, exactly.  Tear gas is inherently indiscriminate.  So you LEAVE, so as not to be part of the problem.  That is all you can do, but it is what you MUST do.  Peaceful protest is over as soon as that first canister is fired and you have already admitted that it is near impossible to exercise control on these things start to disintegrate.  Time to leave.  What can you possibly hope to accomplish after that?

Observe, damage control, take care of any injuries, make sure people are safe, legal clinics continue in keeping track who gets arrested, maintain rest and food area, etc. When things calm down or the groups are done with the direct or violent actions, the plans for peaceful protest continues if there is anything else. Bit hard to simply pack up and leave even if you are not in the area of the violence and tear gassing anymore.

 

[George Wallace]

I do, and I also know how hard it is to arrest, investigate, and prosecute people at protests can be very resource and time extensive, including difficult to prove in court. How would  aiding and abetting a criminal by being part of a crowd that some few masked individuals that committed some violent acts hid in fly with the judge and jury? Then there is also more protests at the police station and court...

There only so much the police themselves can do given the circumstances. If they can't or do not arrest the culprits, are they also aiding and abetting or responsible for the violence in protests?

All these pages and you still haven't caught on to what everyone is saying.  YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE.  As an organizer and a participant in a protest, you are responsible to keep it orderly and peaceful.  You are also responsible to assist the Police in keeping it so.  That would include you and your fellow protesters turning in any "criminals" who may be agitating or promoting violence and property distruction.  You have to have the same frame of mind as that found in a "Neighbourhood Watch".  You are responsible to police yourself.

RESPOSIBILITY.  Take it.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Assuming I fit into that archetype you created of me.

It isn’t an archetype, ours or yours, that matters, Mellian, it is how you will adapt yourself and your worldview to “our” requirements.

You see, young lady, you are in for a long, long period of training and formation before you are a useful member of our team. Perhaps, while you are being formed, Jungle will be your company sergeant major or MARS will be your CO – you would be damned lucky in either case, I know because I know both of them. During that formation I expect that you, like many of us, will learn about responsibility. (Most of us had to learn that in the CF; we were immature and irresponsible when we joined – I was, anyway.) I expect that you will change your mind about the responsibilities that come with authority as soon as the latter is awarded to you – that happened to me, too.

In short, Mellian, while I fear that Jungle is right and that you may have a bit more trouble than most in “our” world I hope you give it a good try, and I hope you succeed. But the key thing is it’s not “your” world, it’s not the easy, comfortable, irresponsible civilian world to which you are accustomed. It is a highly, even deadly responsible world where real grownups, some just in their very early 20s, make life and death decisions in a split second – and live, responsibly, with all the consequences of all their actions and inactions. Welcome.

 

[Fusaki]

The problem with your questions is that you attempt to twist what I say.

No. If that were the case you'd clarify your position and correct me.  What's actually happened is that you've argued yourself against a wall and now you're attempting to sidestep valid points brought against you:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/89668/post-882527.html#msg882527

To be honest, up until now I never gave much thought about the development and mechanics of protests and riots.  After considering what you've written in this thread though, I'm being drawn to the following conclusion:

Protest groups set out to riot by proxy.

1)  Protest groups create the conditions for riots by providing the organization required to mobilize and guide crowds to the target events.

2)  Protest groups encourage rioters to attend these events by providing legal advice and medical care for them.

3)  Protest groups gain publicity by using their "peaceful" image to create propaganda by filming police response to rioters.

But this is the genius part:

4)  Protest groups avoid criminal charges themselves by utilizing anonymous rioters as proxy fighters.  They put in place all the conditions necessary for a riot to happen, but then when it does happen they distance themselves from the rioters by claiming that they cannot be responsible for the actions of individuals. 

These techniques afford the Command and Control wing of a protest organization sufficient political distance from the Propaganda and the Militant wings so that the three parts can all work different angles towards the common goal:  undermining democracy through the illegal promotion of a minority agenda.

 

[Kirkhill]

How do you take responsibility and become accountable for hundreds to thousands of people, especially if they disagree or not part of the plan organization and coordination or part of other groups?

Melllian, as an "organizer" you are voluntarily assuming a leadership role.  You are contributing to the protest by inviting people to that protest.  Implicitly you are responsible for the conduct of all those you invite.  Presumably you personally did not invite all the hundreds and thousands that did show up but those you did invite..... did you vet those people to check their character, to determine if they would follow your lead, if they shared your agenda........ or did you just invite every refugee from the Kingston Penitentiary and then declare yourself not responsible for their actions?

Nobody expects you to be responsible for the actions of all people attending a mass event - they do expect you to be responsible for those you bring to the event - they do expect that you will continue to obey the laws of the land and lawful authority during the event.

PS - congratulations on standing up so well against the onslaught - I disagree with you but I have to admire your tenacity.

Cheers

 

[mellian]

First, I am not part of any protest groups right now, and have not been for the last two years, nor any plans of being in the near future at least and especially if I get accepted in the CF.

Second, I am not anti-police or anti-authourity, and protesting does not make one so.

To continue assuming otherwise does not help the discussion.

A lot of what I say is from pass experience and hindsight, and also mainly limited to protests in Ottawa has been pretty tame in comparison to protests of other cities. 

 

[X-mo-1979]

First, I am not part of any protest groups right now, and have not been for the last two years, nor any plans of being in the near future at least and especially if I get accepted in the CF.

Second, I am not anti-police or anti-authourity, and protesting does not make one so.

To continue assuming otherwise does not help the discussion.

A lot of what I say is from pass experience and hindsight, and also mainly limited to protests in Ottawa has been pretty tame in comparison to protests of other cities.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/80540/post-788460.html#msg788460
"There was also the whole thing of being involved in anti-war, anti-globalization, feminist, and such groups, helping organize, marshal, and participate protests and marches. Overtime, I tone it down and limited to events I care about, as well to focus on other things in life. Even with the other interests and groups which I am still involved in, just seem huge contrast to even consider military. At one point I even considered applying for Ottawa Police, whom I have interesting relations  with (go against officers during a protest one day, and then work with the police the next day about something else)."

 

[George Wallace]

First, I am not part of any protest groups right now, and have not been for the last two years, nor any plans of being in the near future at least and especially if I get accepted in the CF.

Second, I am not anti-police or anti-authourity, and protesting does not make one so.

To continue assuming otherwise does not help the discussion.

No one is accusing you of that.  Everyone is pointing out the errors in your logic.  Obviously, it is all passing well over your head. 

 

[mariomike]

Second, I am not anti-police or anti-authourity, and protesting does not make one so.

Then come join us. It's an adrenalin rush! I can promise you that much.
I like the way the Colonel explained it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMEViYvojtY

 

[mellian]

All these pages and you still haven't caught on to what everyone is saying.  YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE.  As an organizer and a participant in a protest, you are responsible to keep it orderly and peaceful.  You are also responsible to assist the Police in keeping it so.  That would include you and your fellow protesters turning in any "criminals" who may be agitating or promoting violence and property distruction.  You have to have the same frame of mind as that found in a "Neighbourhood Watch".  You are responsible to police yourself.

RESPOSIBILITY.  Take it.

Reminds me in one occasion during the G20 protest in 2001 where I was tagging along mainly as an observer, staying on the side or front of marches and demonstrations. When the marches when down Wellington street by the Parliament, I walked a long the other side of the stone fence.

Realized quickly how a bad idea that was, as police positioned near the west entrance and they spotted. Knowing climbing over the fence and getting back with the march while couple riot officers came towards me would be a bad idea, so continued to approach them, told them the truth why I was there, and led back off Parliament property towards the front of the march. 

Once in the front side of the march, I then get confronted by few different individuals asking/accusing me being a police officer or working for them or spying. They continued to keep an eye on me for a bit and eventually lost interest.

What would have happened if I was, or even went to the police to tell them about some of them? Not trusted and some kind of encouragement to exile me...or maybe lectured too.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Once in the front side of the march, I then get confronted by few different individuals asking/accusing me being a police officer or working for them or spying. They continued to keep an eye on me for a bit and eventually lost interest.

My question is what do these "peaceful protesters" have against the police?  If they are truely there for a peaceful demonstration, then they should have no problem with anyone involved talking to the police.  If they were "violent" demonstrators, then they should well be put away... 

 

[mellian]

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/80540/post-788460.html#msg788460

Even with the other interests and groups which I am still involved in, just seem huge contrast to even consider military.

Not all 'groups' and organizations I am involved with are protest related.

 

[MARS]

When things calm down or the groups are done with the direct or violent actions, the plans for peaceful protest continues if there is anything else.

I think that is the crux of the problem here - and a whole lot of wishful thinking.  It is like trying to put the genie back in the bottle. It is not going to happen.

The DA in Seattle and QC never stopped.  Day after day it simply got worse.  There was nothing positive to come from any of it, nothing peaceful to be continued, by noon on 30 November - trust me.  A State of Emergency was declared - people were directed to stay out of the city or in our case, in our hotel.  These are the authorities issuing these directives - why didn't people listen?  Because that is no fun.  Anyone and everyone that entered the downtown core after 1100 on 30 November was part of the problem - regardless of their motives -  and all it did was limit the options available to the security services.  They all deserved to be tear gassed.  And they should have gone home as soon as it hit.

A lot of what I say is from pass experience and hindsight, and also mainly limited to protests in Ottawa has been pretty tame in comparison to protests of other cities

You are correct - they were "tame" to the point of being a joke compared to Seattle and QC.  I guess we speak from different experiences.  My point is that people didn't want to leave.  Even the ones who didn't want to see things get so bad.  They wanted to be part of it, or at least near it - the chaos and destruction - just to tell their friends that "they were there, man". That makes life considerably more difficult for those who were trying to maintain control - law and order as it were.  Too many people - organizers - who had the responsibility to do something to encourage people to go home - didn't.  People like Jaggi...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaggi_Singh

I have met him and spoken with him at some length.  Now there is a true "organizer" - someone who does and can exercise control though his words and actions.  Unfortunate that he stands on the other side of the fence from me, and, as I have said, is part of the problem.  But, he is acutely aware of the span of his control - and the limits of it and how to use it effectively.  He is no dummy, just wrong in my opinion. 

 

[George Wallace]

Not all 'groups' and organizations I am involved with are protest related.

And they are not part of this discussion.