“This first approach was fairly tentative—largely nonviolent protesters dipping their toes into the water. Initially, the protesters were outnumbered by the cops, but then as more and more of them converged, they eventually outnumbered the police and started drawing closer and closer to the line: taking pictures, chanting, singing, screaming invective. “
More at The Torontoist (h/t subversible).
Not so related; “Sir, I’m going to ask you to move along. There’s really nothing to see here.” I’m staying off that particular bandwagon, but then again, I don’t pull over at the side of the road to rubberneck at accidents, either. In short, what appears to have started out as a police request to “move along” rapidly escalates into mockery and a overwhelming show of police non-violence.
“But civilian photographers will be rebuffed with a force in equal contradistinction to that not being applied to the rioters themselves.”
Except, you know, there was no force. They stuck around for 5 minutes and left under their own steam.
(By the way – who the hell picks a G20 weekend to hold their pro-Israel rally? I thought Jews were the smart ones?)
Turns out the local CFS-affiliated University was housing some of the violent ones after all:
http://takebackyourschool.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/your-student-dollars-at-work/
So much for the CFS protesters being blameless in the rioting.
Every honest Canadian must be appalled and protest a secretly made amendment to CCC which gave police power to arrest anyone near security perimeter who refuses to identify himself.
Under Canadian law CC is a federal matter and provinces can’t create new offenses by regulation.
The federal government fubared G20.
These idiots don’t understand that it’s their undoing. And the idiots on this blog don’t understand that they’ve been had on the promise to allow you to keep your guns. Harper is not a conservative – he is an opportunist. He saw a business opportunity in promising you gun and property rights and you swallowed that lure. He is still riding the bandwagon he jumped on and you are still giving him excuses for not delivering on any promises he had made.
Poor you.
The commmie/socialist/progressive lefties are going to be in for a surprise at some point. Aaron, those guns we never gave up. Come and get ’em proggy.
Marko, the libs who will be elected next have a semi-auto ban already drafted. They will lay in wait until the cons fubar their support enough. There will be liberal government in Canada one day and PMSH seems to be hell bent on bringing that day closer.
I can take my guns elsewhere, but not everyone has that luxury. Plus I don’t want to leave over the single issue.
You are dragging me along supporting that shepp in wolf clothes.
[quote]University of Toronto administrators are hauling in leaders of their Graduate Student Union Monday to explain why a union-run campus building was used to house out-of- town protesters over the weekend.[/quote]
There are a “Billion” reasons why criminal charges MUST be brought against ALL those involved, including U of T administrators… This is not trivial behavior that can be shoved under an administrative cover-up…
The CBC dropped the story, now reporting on the lack of five star room service in the lockup… Journalists that think a security clearance is an administrative process. Drivel by the drivel network
All those involved in the demonstration are guilty of the riots & thug’s they enabled,
regardless of personal involvement…
The Names, Pictures & background of all those involved, in the NOT peaceful demonstration, MUST be made available to the general public. This must include names, etc. of the parents of those under 18… Combating International terrorism, riots, conspiracies require large funding (1 billion) and taxpayers deserve to see the “end” results.
I think deadly force, at the boundary fence, is cheaper & morally justified…Let the host city pay it’s own cost for childish civil disorder
Aaron, we’ve had this argument before. You aren’t going to get every damn thing you want, right now, from any political party. Ever.
Yes, hosting G20 was dumb. That’s a given. But look at the spectacle the Left has made of themselves here, and give thanks for this silver lining in the billion dollar cloud. The people of Toronto finally got their noses rubbed in the cost of tolerating the loony Left, and from all accounts they’re disgusted. That’s good. It isn’t enough of a payback to make up for a billion bucks, but I’ll take it.
The way the Canadian political process works is -slowly-. You take a little bit, you wait a while, then take a little bit more. The Liberals understand this, and they are LAUGHING at you if you vote for them in protest against Harper or spoil your ballot in a fit of pique.
You want to be laughed at by jackals, that’s cool. Me, I like to defeat them and hang their tails on my barn.
Oh by the way, your guns aren’t going to help a lot when three hundred cops show up at your house. With a tank. Ask David Koresh about that, eh?
You have to beat that problem at the ballot box before it happens.
After reading the the Torontoist it sounds like its time for “normal” citizens to gather for a Thank the Cops rally. Or have a morning where people are encouraged to applaud when they see the police.
Whatever their orders were, the guys and gals on the line did a great job.
Phillip G. Shaw said: “I think deadly force, at the boundary fence, is cheaper & morally justified…Let the host city pay it’s own cost for childish civil disorder”
Phillip, I share your frustration. But the use of deadly force is best left to individuals protecting their property. Governments tend to get carried away with the whole deadly force thing, as we know to our cost.
I think it would be more productive to have the G20 at a remote location and arrest -everybody- who shows up to break stuff. Let them go nuts breaking the forest up around Timmins.
I will say that the strategic application of -non- deadly force could have been much more well done. Stomp on the first dickweed that throws a rock through a window, and he will be an object lesson to the others. Cops are going to be made to look bad no matter what, they may as well look bad while getting the job done than look bad not doing it.
Agreed Stephen.
Normal as in not Shaidle the 50 year old teenage attention seeker, or Arnie “I’m on a public sidewalk and who cares if there’s a riot” types.
Being one of the ones to call for a renaming of the Beaches as “Heads Smashed In, Rioters Put Down” on Saturday, I’d be loathe to exempt Shaidle from that simply because she’s an activist I tend to agree with more often than not.
I dunno, maybe her and Arnie could set up a blockade busting flotilla to break the line because she’s acting like a Hamas apologist.
But I’m also sure the irony is lost on her.
For an opinionated woman with no fear of sharing that opinion, she sure takes offence to mockery, but then consistency isn’t something you expect from Shaidle.
OVER THE TOP REACTIONS, yes. Consistency, no.
Why was hosting the G20 dumb? Is Canada declaring that it is unable to host such an event?
These leaders have to meet; we cannot live in a world where it is impossible for them to meet and discuss issues! This has to be in a large city, because of hotels and airports.
As for the ‘protesters’ – they are 90% naive and ignorant juveniles who are out for a weekend of fun, and 10% criminal thugs who are out for the sheer power of destruction. Many of the latter came in, by bus, from Quebec (famed for its riots over hockey), and were housed, illegaly by the U of T student union.
What did the naive ‘protesters’ want? Well, those who had any idea of why they were there, apart from the fun, talked in vague amorphous terms of..the usual. Poverty, increase in welfare..oh, and some wanted free university and college tuition. In other words, a life of remaining a child.
Of course, the criminals have the usual mantra as well: anti-capitalism, anti-corporation, anti-American. They utterly ignore the fact that the buses they came into town on, were built by corporations and capitalism; that the buildings they stayed overnight in, were funded by corporations and capitalism…and etc. Their ignorance is astonishing. But their real reason is psychological; they love to destroy.
And those who were detained – their complaints were: the water they were given was ‘dirty’ (?); only a sandwich was offered, the rooms were cramped and cold. As I’ve said before, all 4 star hotels were booked solid and I’m sure the police and government told these demonstrators that beforehand.
Aaron, I can’t see any problem with arresting someone near the security fence who refuses to identify himself. After all, to go through an airport check-in, you must identify yourself. To get medical care you must…; to cash a check, to enter a secure building or condominium or gated community, to..etc etc. What is so outrageous in your mind about, just as you identify yourself in other security zones, identifying yourself at a security fence?
“Stomp on the first dickweed that throws a rock through a window, and he will be an object lesson to the others.”
Precisely. Things would have been a lot different had police stomped the first 10-20 protesters that took it upon themselves to vandalize vehicles and storefronts.
Nothing will cause a person to think twice more than the potential of immediate physical pain.
Phantom,
This si a constant meme, hold it somewhere else. Here is the problem, it doesnt matter.
When the leaders gathered in Kananaskis in 2002 where did the proto anarchist groups gather, the nearest metropolis, Calgary.
Did the protestors go to huntsville? No, they gathered in Toronto….and not just because the G20 was here. Cities are their ebvironment and holding it in a remote location only splits the security forces. What explains the violent rally in Vancouver, over 3000 km away?
Second point, are you only able to hold politcal acceptable meetings in Toronto? The problem isnt the meeting, the problem are the criminal protesters. Dont fall for the argument that says its trees fault that the axe cut it.
Security resources are better concentrated. The only argument for the remote location would be to better defend against a terrorist attack. the mob attack will always go to an urban environment, no matter where the leaders are.
Aaron: You obviously missed the memo. I’ll quote it below.
Dear CPC Members: We are all progressives now.
As far as the G20, my opinion is that one should not blame the officers on the line. They take orders and are constantly looking over their shoulder at the progressive hacks in power who will make an example of any officer who steps out of line; not to mention the progressive media who will even manufacture crisis. Like soldiers, it’s their job to basically do as they are told as set out in statute. Ontarians elected a progressive power, and the police simply reflect that. Sadly, they get crapped on from all sides.
> Aaron, I can’t see any problem with arresting someone near the security fence who refuses to identify himself.
Then you are my sworn enemy, ET.
If you like to be randomly asked for papers, move to Russia.
> Why was hosting the G20 dumb?
Because 2 lunches and a photo op costing a billion dollars means that Canada made a bad decision and paid lots of money to the wrong people.
At the same time our hockey rinks are disappearing and our children get substandard education at schools. How much more quality of life could that billion dollar buy Canada instead? Lots.
Thank you, Cjunk.
Aaron:
Choosing to stand at the perimeter of a defined security zone excludes you from the definition of “random” bystander, so have your papers ready, or walk away.
Kate McMillan adds, “Any city that stands aside to photograph itself burning — deserves to.”
Nice line.
aaron,
do you drive? You have to take your license with you. Did you go to college or university? Cant get into a bunch of places without your student card. Gone to concert, hockey game or baseball game recently, knapsacks and purses are searched.
While I am sypathetic that people should be allowed to move around public spaces without ID or search it doesnt apply in this case.
Do you believe you could hang around the fence of a military base without being asked for ID? Do that in fron of a police station or a government building for any length of time and the same thing happens (under THIS very law)
Stop hyperventilating about this. It is minor, temporary and clearly justified. Comaprisons to a police state only reveal your innocence and lack of understanding what a police state REALLY is.
Your “hockey rinks are disappearing”?
Then build one. Just like most of rural Canada has – and operates – with volunteer labour.
Off-topic, but Senator Robert Byrd is dead. This now deprives the Dems, once again, of their 60-seat filibuster proof edge in the Senate.
First, Kennedy, now Byrd. Wonder which aging gasbag will be next?
Aaron,
One more question. Have you ever been part of a club or a group of friends who have gatherings or parties. Essentially, the meeting moves from one house to the other and the host pays for snacks and drinks etc….same with kids soccer.
We wont have to do it again for 20 years. Unless you are saying we should be part of the club but never contribute.
Now that I think about it that must be the issue, no summit meetings under a non conservative government for a generation.
I guess you also complain that we dont have enough influence in the world.
Aaron being randomly asked for papers does not apply in this situation. If you are walking down the street enjoying the sun and a cop demands to see your papers then your analogy would apply. However this was a secured area which meant you had to have proper ID to enter. For example: The last time I was on the flight line at CFB Cold Lake I had to produce ID to get there and ID could have been demanded of me at any time while on the flight line. Had I decided to evade security and wander the flight line the Military Police would be within their mandate to demand proper ID and should I fail to produce it arrest me. Its called security.
I’m pretty much tired of listening to those who are trying to convince me that they have the right to wander the streets as a public citizen during a high security event where violence had already broken out. The only purpose that these individuals want to project is to ‘test’ their rights. Well, go ahead, and you will find that your rights are actually limited. Police have always had the right to ask for identification and your business whenever you are in the public and particularly during a secure event. That isn’t some sort of vast conspiracy to subvert your rights – it is part of being part of society. If you want to live off the grid in an isolated place – go ahead, but as soon as you agree to live in a community where there are multiple interests competing and receive any of the benefits of that community there is a trade off.
I lost a lot of respect of Kathy Shalide this weekend – her actions (and those of thousands of others who were only ‘watching”) just compound a tense situation where real danger is possible. You can choose to help a situation (for example not rubber necking at an accident thereby increasing the danger of those working the accident) or you can hinder a situation – Kathy you were an hindrance.
Lance there was no riot. We were on Bloor Street well away from any protest activity. The 30 or police on hand to subdue the 6 cuffed and seated miscreants were more than equal to the task of handling any sudden outburst of violence that may have spontaneously erupted from the passing parade of Sunday shoppers and any of the other citizens photoing the activity. The officer demanded we stop filming and move along, we refused, he became frustrated at his inabilty to intimidate and thus prevent us from engaging in a lawful rightful activity.
Allowing the cops to do whatever they want to do because you say so isn’t any argument at all.
You may wish to live in a society where your rights are fundamentally undermined on the arbitrary whim of an unprofessional cop. I don’t.
the cops did a wonderful job making sure things did not get totally out of control. saturday especially, they refused to get provoked into nasty incidents. but sunday, the cops were much more aggressive. very likely in reaction to saturday, but i think its fair to at least question some of their tactics.
no matter what, your are totally correct kate…. it wasn’t FORCE. and i am thankful for that. nobody got killed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Heb9BXjYcII
We are discussing two different sets of cops here.
The cops dealing with anarchists were doing their best AFTER the rip on Yonge St. on Saturday. I still question the absence of cops in that situation.
However, can anyone explain why Arnie was told to stop his camera at a pro-Israel rally?
> so have your papers ready, or walk away.
Now you completely exposed yourself as a collectivist and of the most fascist kind (you are pretending you are the opposite).
> For example: The last time I was on the flight line at CFB Cold Lake I had to produce ID
Comparing being in DT TO to flying commercial airplane is comparing apples and oranges. One you can’t help if you are a resident and another is voluntary acceptance of a business offer.
1) The secret regulation created by the city vaguely defined the arrest area as near security perimeter.
2) Municipal and provincial government can’t create criminal offenses.
So Blazing, I guess you will be first to the barricades when a cop stops some brown guy with a camera and asks him why he is filming the Stock exchange or union station.
Come on, I thought you guys had more common sense than what you did. Or did you not notice that lots of the idiots who were causing problem looked like you, white, normal and with cameras.
A little unaware werent we?
> stops some brown guy with a camera and asks him why he is filming the Stock exchange or union station.
They can’t. If they could, they’d had to stop Google.
Ring me up when you can actually make some sense Stephen.
Oh please, Maureen.
Do you think the guy who filmed the Rodney King beating was “hindering” something?
I have a right to walk on the streets I helped pay for, and use a camera in a public place.
And the pro-Israel rally was held to try to take advantage of the international media present at the G20. I don’t think it did so successfully, but many groups do likewise, at all these sorts of events.
It’s normally ineffective, but it’s a pretty established tactic.
The misplaced and over-heated hostility I’m getting from so many normally intelligent people over this shows way more about them than it does about me.
Lance’s name-calling is particularly embarrassing — for him. Why so touchy, sonny?
Aaron,
They have and they do, or have you missed all th ecomplaints of racial profiling when the cops do this, on occasion.
But you missed the point because Blazing would normally defend that kind of police behaviour.
In both cases it is generally a “shoo fly” move on behalf of the cops. If there is other behaviour creating “probable cause” or suspicion then they can ask to see what you were up to, and take you into custody if you refuse.
This isnt collectivist fascism….goodness are we going to see the badly misused term neo con soon…..its simple policing.
Back to your original point, you can dance all around the former security zone tomorrow to your hearts content. So whatever problem may have existed no longer does, relax
I just don’t see how this is going to work. How can Canada become the police state it seems to want to be when the police are just not up to the job?
Most pathetic police state EVER.
arne,
Give me your number and I will happily call, no hostility, just think you guys misread the situation.
Why on a weekend when the cops are probably wound tighter than a drum would you act like that. really, common sense should prevail.
A review of the last few days…
Bad: cops coming to your house warning you not to take part in real or imagined protests
Good: cops coming up to you on the street, warning you not to take photos of (non) protests.
Got it.
I don’t see any “overheated hostility”. In fact, until I posted this, I saw a lot of unthinking support from the usual suspects.
I mean – where was the force, really?
You described a pretty routine exchange between lippy bystanders and a cop practicing routine police work that could have happened anywhere in Canada, on any given day, and yet decided it was worth singling out a specific police officer over it?
The fact that people disagree with you just means that they disagree, Kathy. The comment about it “saying more about them than it does you” is a little thin skinned.
Remember, they’re reading your account of the incident – not mine.
> So whatever problem may have existed no longer does, relax
It was a dry run, dude, following 4 year history of willful undoing of almost 400 years of human rights protection originating from decapitation of king Charles I by Cromwell.
Canadian provinces have been attempting to suspend the rule of law in favour of certain groups and individuals since bread was sliced, so nothing new here. Worst thing you are accepting that at face value as it does not immediately bother you until you are not gassed.
You’re right Kate. And Kathy, you’ve shown that all of the addled aren’t on the left.
“I mean – where was the force, really?”
Kate who said anything about use of force? Neither of us mentioned it. As for being “Lippy” we were in fact exceedingly polite, deliberately so until the officer became agitated when he realized I had turned my camera on. His uncivil tone triggered Kathy’s response not the other way around. Having fudamental rights trampled on whether by one or a hundred cops in an arbitrary manner is an issue for us and many others.
Read the Wikipedia account of the aftermath of the Battle in Seattle 10 years ago:
http://tinyurl.com/l6waan
Executive Summary? The Seattle mayor and police chief lost their jobs, the city lost millions in legal settlements, and the anarchists considered it a great victory.
In a situation such as this there tends to be, ah, collateral damage, i.e. harassment, physical harm, and/or violation of civil rights to reporters and innocent citizens.
That “collateral” damage is regrettable and deplorable. Had it happened to me or mine, I’d be as personally furious.
Still, the real villains in all this are ultimately the blackguards in black, and we shouldn’t forget that.
“Kate who said anything about use of force?”
Please review the quote provided.
“You you might hear from my lawyer….I have 10,000 readers, including politicians.”
I was half expecting Shaidle to say that Mark Steyn had words of praise for her book.
Pathetic publicity/vanity stunt.
> the city lost millions in legal settlements
Million is 1/1000 of a billion.
Aaron,
Trying to parse the argument here.
Is your argument that the government is unequal in its application of protections and rights to groups and communities? If so, then there is a bunch of common ground.
But I fail to see what that has to do with saying there is a temporary security perimeter protecting a bunch of heads of government.
Now the “law” that was used is an existing one and the added the security zone to it. Was it done in as transparent a method as possible….no…do I have trouble with what they did, as opposed to how they did it, no. So the complaint is one of process not result, and a reasonable complaint.
buuuuuut, in the list of things to worry about at this time, this is pretty low on the list due to its limited nature, a post hoc review of its responsible use (lack of abuse) and the high impact of it not being available.
By all means lets discuss the process and review the law and its application….but it isnt so egregious and there are numerous examples to show it isnt unprecendented in other parts of every day living that we accept.
So, it seems that the issue emerging here and some of the other disputes on this thread are about the apparent contradiction in police strategies and actions. Thats worth discussing because it is worth examing and there are legitimate viewpoints on both sides
1) Why the difference between Sat and Sunday
2) Why not crack heads
3) Did the cops focus too much on protecting the security zones at the cost of property damage
4) Is lives over property always a legitimate policy
Lots to both sides and there are more questions.
I hope I didnt misrepresent your viewpoint.
Being a pragmatist I’ve learned to pull in my horns with certain people in positions of power. High on the list are cops, judges and camp cooks. They can all make your life miserable.
Some of then I came across were in fact a$$holes but I managed to overlook that in lieu of a spit laden meal.
Syncro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ze4F1Oetiw&feature=related
The cops may have been tightly wound, I suspect they were; but I know that they were horribly lead and managed. The trashing of Younge Street was entirely preventable – but it would have lead to some fairly hard core photos which would have been bad for cop and city PR.
The arrests on Sunday were largely pointless.
As for Arnie and Kathy – either you have rights or you don’t. If you do then taking pictures in a public place is certainly one of them. And if a cop thinks he can tell you not to then, in fact, you don’t have the rights you think you do.
I suggest for future security where protesters and mobs are hell bent on taking over the agenda our security and police save millions for Canadian Taxpayer and bring these demonstrations to an immediate halt by loading their water cannons with pig sh-t and telling the mob they have 10 seconds to clear the area. I am sure it will be very cost effective and the clean up will cost peanuts in comparison to coddling of the anarchists with our present security measures. Hey and our measure is also going green – that would even keep some demonstrators very happy.
Cjunk nailed it so well it needs repeating !!
“As far as the G20, my opinion is that one should not blame the officers on the line. They take orders and are constantly looking over their shoulder at the progressive hacks in power who will make an example of any officer who steps out of line; not to mention the progressive media who will even manufacture crisis. Like soldiers, it’s their job to basically do as they are told as set out in statute. Ontarians elected a progressive power, and the police simply reflect that. Sadly, they get crapped on from all sides.”
> what that has to do with saying there is a temporary security perimeter
I am beginning to understand where you are coming from. Guess you are not familiar with the verbiage of the temporary law, allowing police to arrest anyone who refused to identify themselves.
Arrest is a criminal matter. Police services act of Ontario allows police to arrest only those, who can be lawfully taken into custody. To take someone into custody lawfully police have to act on a criminal code offense related complaint.
Do you still see no harm in a city creating a new criminal offense w/o legislative approval?
But let me sum it up one last time: you’d have to live in a socialist country to recognize socialism. I do recognize it when I see it, while you don’t. Sometimes even Canadians have to listen, no matter how humiliating this concept may sound.