G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 733
- Points
- 1,160
I was reading todays Kingston Whig Standard and they had an article about two Queen's students who were part of a group who were bussed in for march in support of the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty. The article had this little quote from one of the students:
Full article here.
This reminds me of a quote attributed to Maude Barlow after the Summit of the America's riots in Quebec City eight years ago. When she was asked about the damage caused to several business,' she replied (I paraphrase) "It's just property." But, heaven forbid, if someone threw a brick through THEIR window, they would be screaming to have the thrower crucified on the front lawn!
I just shake my head in despair.
(My Hi-lights)
Full article here.
This reminds me of a quote attributed to Maude Barlow after the Summit of the America's riots in Quebec City eight years ago. When she was asked about the damage caused to several business,' she replied (I paraphrase) "It's just property." But, heaven forbid, if someone threw a brick through THEIR window, they would be screaming to have the thrower crucified on the front lawn!
I just shake my head in despair.
- Reaction score
- 3,032
- Points
- 1,260
Until the student's kit gets destroyed, right? :
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 733
- Points
- 1,160
milnews.ca said:
Until the student's kit gets destroyed, right? :
As long as its someone else's :nana:
- Reaction score
- 3,032
- Points
- 1,260
"We want to shop!" "It's just a spectacle to you?" Retailer rage - thanks for sharing that!Technoviking said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Technoviking said:
That dude has THE CRAZY in his eyes! Forget the CC 31 arrest, MHA Form 1 apprehension!
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Points
- 1,260
"Summit moved from CNE to downtown over Toronto’s objections, mayor says:
OTTAWA – Mayor David Miller says that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government routinely ignored or discounted advice from Toronto in the run-up to the G20 summit – including Miller’s own, repeated pleas to hold the event at the grounds of Exhibition Place.
The resulting chaos may have proved to be a lesson, Miller says, since federal officials are consulting now with the city on the issue of compensation for damages to people and property in violent protests at the G20.
But the mayor is still waiting to hear from anyone at the federal level – or the provincial level, for that matter – with statements of support or sympathy for the affected residents of Toronto.
“I understand why the Prime Minister might not have called on Saturday or Sunday, but I would have thought his office would have said something by now. Same with the premier, given that we’re the capital of Ontario,” Miller said.
In a blunt interview with the Star on Tuesday, Miller said that when he originally endorsed the choice of Toronto for the G20 event last December, he had been told it was being held on the CNE grounds, far away from the downtown core that was ravaged by protests and police confrontations on the weekend.
But, as with the decision to announce Toronto as the summit site, Miller says that Toronto officials were not consulted either when the event was moved to the convention centre earlier this year.
In fact, the mayor said he’d argued strenuously against the convention-centre venue at a briefing he received on Ottawa’s summit plans. Miller recounts events this way:
“The federal government had been speaking through the RCMP to Toronto police because they were working with them on the G8-G20 in Huntsville,” he said. At some point last fall, Miller said, Toronto police officials gave him a heads-up that the G20 could be held in Toronto.
“Subsequent to that, the federal government began negotiating with Exhibition Place and from my perspective, had reached an agreement with Exhibition Place – certainly an agreement in principle.
It was after this, Miller said, that he received a perfunctory call from the Prime Minister’s Office, asking whether he had any objections to the G20 being held in Toronto.
“We indicated no, on the understanding at the time that an agreement had been reached to host it at Exhibition Place.”
The federal government announced Toronto as the G20 site in early December, without specifying formally where the event would be held. But Miller said he soon started hearing – again, indirectly, that there was talk of moving the event to the Metro Convention Centre, in the heart of downtown.
“We pushed very strongly to change that decision, because I was very worried that you couldn’t have an event like this in the middle of downtown Toronto,” said Miller. He said he made this argument in a private briefing with federal officials preparing the summit, but his advice was ignored.
Miller says this fits with a repeated pattern of the Harper government and the Prime Minister himself.
“It’s very clear,” he said. “Institutionally, the federal government deals with provinces, not cities. And under Mr. Harper, I don’t mean this from a partisan perspective, but he reads the constitution literally, so he will deal with the province. If there’s an event in Toronto, he will deal with the province.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said on Monday that the Exhibition grounds had been ruled out because it had no hotels for the leaders, and additional challenges that would create to travel and security in and out of the areas.
Miller, who did his own walkabout of damaged stores and buildings on Queen Street on Tuesday, said he’s cautiously optimistic that the federal government has learned to work with Toronto in the wake of the weekend events, and he’s been assuring people that compensation negotiations are under way.
For now, the federal government is only saying that it will deal with compensation on a case-by-case basis. But there is a precedent: After violent protests caused damage during the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City in 2001, Ottawa announced a $2 million fund to compensate merchants, residents and non-profit organizations for damages.
Harper spokesperson Dimitri Soudas said moving the Toronto summit a few blocks away would not have changed the destructive outcome.
“Whether you hold it two blocks to the east or two blocks to the west in downtown Toronto or two blocks to the north or two blocks to the south these people have a clear intention and that is to be violent and cause destruction. It wouldn’t have made any difference in terms of the intentions that these hooligans and thugs have,” he said.
He noted that when the G8 was held in a the remote area of Kananaskis, Alberta in 2002 protesters still gathered 100 kilometres away in Calgary.
Soudas, said he did know whether the original plans called for the summit to be held at the Exhibition grounds. “I honestly don’t know because I don’t do site selection,” he said.
Soudas added that he knew nothing of quiet talks going on between Ottawa and Toronto with respect to compensation for shopkeepers whose store were damaged during Saturday’s rioting in the downtown.
Soudas said there has been a compensation package for summjts for nine years now and any shopkeepers or any other businesses will have to apply through that, http://g20.gc.ca/important
http://www.thestar.com/article/830274--toronto-s-advice-ignored-on-g20-miller-says
OTTAWA – Mayor David Miller says that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government routinely ignored or discounted advice from Toronto in the run-up to the G20 summit – including Miller’s own, repeated pleas to hold the event at the grounds of Exhibition Place.
The resulting chaos may have proved to be a lesson, Miller says, since federal officials are consulting now with the city on the issue of compensation for damages to people and property in violent protests at the G20.
But the mayor is still waiting to hear from anyone at the federal level – or the provincial level, for that matter – with statements of support or sympathy for the affected residents of Toronto.
“I understand why the Prime Minister might not have called on Saturday or Sunday, but I would have thought his office would have said something by now. Same with the premier, given that we’re the capital of Ontario,” Miller said.
In a blunt interview with the Star on Tuesday, Miller said that when he originally endorsed the choice of Toronto for the G20 event last December, he had been told it was being held on the CNE grounds, far away from the downtown core that was ravaged by protests and police confrontations on the weekend.
But, as with the decision to announce Toronto as the summit site, Miller says that Toronto officials were not consulted either when the event was moved to the convention centre earlier this year.
In fact, the mayor said he’d argued strenuously against the convention-centre venue at a briefing he received on Ottawa’s summit plans. Miller recounts events this way:
“The federal government had been speaking through the RCMP to Toronto police because they were working with them on the G8-G20 in Huntsville,” he said. At some point last fall, Miller said, Toronto police officials gave him a heads-up that the G20 could be held in Toronto.
“Subsequent to that, the federal government began negotiating with Exhibition Place and from my perspective, had reached an agreement with Exhibition Place – certainly an agreement in principle.
It was after this, Miller said, that he received a perfunctory call from the Prime Minister’s Office, asking whether he had any objections to the G20 being held in Toronto.
“We indicated no, on the understanding at the time that an agreement had been reached to host it at Exhibition Place.”
The federal government announced Toronto as the G20 site in early December, without specifying formally where the event would be held. But Miller said he soon started hearing – again, indirectly, that there was talk of moving the event to the Metro Convention Centre, in the heart of downtown.
“We pushed very strongly to change that decision, because I was very worried that you couldn’t have an event like this in the middle of downtown Toronto,” said Miller. He said he made this argument in a private briefing with federal officials preparing the summit, but his advice was ignored.
Miller says this fits with a repeated pattern of the Harper government and the Prime Minister himself.
“It’s very clear,” he said. “Institutionally, the federal government deals with provinces, not cities. And under Mr. Harper, I don’t mean this from a partisan perspective, but he reads the constitution literally, so he will deal with the province. If there’s an event in Toronto, he will deal with the province.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said on Monday that the Exhibition grounds had been ruled out because it had no hotels for the leaders, and additional challenges that would create to travel and security in and out of the areas.
Miller, who did his own walkabout of damaged stores and buildings on Queen Street on Tuesday, said he’s cautiously optimistic that the federal government has learned to work with Toronto in the wake of the weekend events, and he’s been assuring people that compensation negotiations are under way.
For now, the federal government is only saying that it will deal with compensation on a case-by-case basis. But there is a precedent: After violent protests caused damage during the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City in 2001, Ottawa announced a $2 million fund to compensate merchants, residents and non-profit organizations for damages.
Harper spokesperson Dimitri Soudas said moving the Toronto summit a few blocks away would not have changed the destructive outcome.
“Whether you hold it two blocks to the east or two blocks to the west in downtown Toronto or two blocks to the north or two blocks to the south these people have a clear intention and that is to be violent and cause destruction. It wouldn’t have made any difference in terms of the intentions that these hooligans and thugs have,” he said.
He noted that when the G8 was held in a the remote area of Kananaskis, Alberta in 2002 protesters still gathered 100 kilometres away in Calgary.
Soudas, said he did know whether the original plans called for the summit to be held at the Exhibition grounds. “I honestly don’t know because I don’t do site selection,” he said.
Soudas added that he knew nothing of quiet talks going on between Ottawa and Toronto with respect to compensation for shopkeepers whose store were damaged during Saturday’s rioting in the downtown.
Soudas said there has been a compensation package for summjts for nine years now and any shopkeepers or any other businesses will have to apply through that, http://g20.gc.ca/important
http://www.thestar.com/article/830274--toronto-s-advice-ignored-on-g20-miller-says
- Reaction score
- 2,671
- Points
- 940
Yet one more fine example of representative government to come out of the G20.mariomike said:
Just as most Canadians think the protesters and their causes are quackery, (for those who actually have causes beyond vandalism), most Canadian voters routinely ignore or discount Toronto.
Go Democracy! ;D
Edited because, although I doubt there was any misunderstanding by any forum readers, I care about peoples' sensitivities :
...oh, and thank you for reaffirming why 'Toronto the whiney' gets ignored
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 6,395
- Points
- 1,160
http://news.aol.ca/ca/article/torontos-top-cop-admits-controversial-g20-security-rule-didnt/19536721?icid=main|canada-toshiba|dl1|link4|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.ca%2Fca%2Farticle%2Ftorontos-top-cop-admits-controversial-g20-security-rule-didnt%2F19536721
I can't say I'm very impressed with a police force that lies to me or makes up laws.
I can't say I'm very impressed with a police force that lies to me or makes up laws.
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Points
- 1,260
Regarding: Reply #592
Don't put words in my mouth.
That was the mayor you quoted. You did not quote his complete sentence: "OTTAWA – Mayor David Miller says that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government routinely ignored or discounted advice from Toronto in the run-up to the G20 summit – including Miller’s own, repeated pleas to hold the event at the grounds of Exhibition Place."
Don't put words in my mouth.
That was the mayor you quoted. You did not quote his complete sentence: "OTTAWA – Mayor David Miller says that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government routinely ignored or discounted advice from Toronto in the run-up to the G20 summit – including Miller’s own, repeated pleas to hold the event at the grounds of Exhibition Place."
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Apollo Diomedes said:
Yeah, no sh|t.
I didn't do the things I did in Afghanistan so our police services could lie to us.
I went downtown on Sunday the 27th to see for myself what was going on. While I did see the vast majority of cops and protestors handle themselves in an ethical manner, I have major issues with individual authorities and activists who did not.
- Reaction score
- 1,438
- Points
- 1,260
The Canadian Press:
"McGuinty blamed for confusion on secret law: TORONTO - Ontario's opposition parties say Premier Dalton McGuinty is to blame for confusion surrounding police powers to stop, search and detain people during the G20 summit.":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100630/national/g20_secret_law
"McGuinty blamed for confusion on secret law: TORONTO - Ontario's opposition parties say Premier Dalton McGuinty is to blame for confusion surrounding police powers to stop, search and detain people during the G20 summit.":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100630/national/g20_secret_law
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Here's the thing though:
I personally saw at least a half dozen people searched and arrested well outside of the security zone, and nowhere near any unruly protest.
To be fair, I have strong suspicions that at least one or two of those people were actually criminals who had been engaging in Black Bloc tactics. It's also important to note that I wasn't listening in on the police radio net, and I don't know what kind of information was being provided by plainclothes police who were more than likely in the area or those police who had infiltrated criminal groups.
That said, I saw a number of situations where police, standing on streetcorners outside of the security zone and seemingly not engaged in the search for specific individuals, stop and search what seemed to be random people who were doing nothing more than wearing black, carrying backpacks, long hair, piercings, and tattoos.
I'm usually quick to defend the guy on the ground who's making the call. I've been involved in real-life high-risk security operations and I know that there's usually more to every situation than meets the eye. It's from that perspective that I'll come on here and say that on Sunday I personally saw police action that I believe to be just plain wrong.
I personally saw at least a half dozen people searched and arrested well outside of the security zone, and nowhere near any unruly protest.
To be fair, I have strong suspicions that at least one or two of those people were actually criminals who had been engaging in Black Bloc tactics. It's also important to note that I wasn't listening in on the police radio net, and I don't know what kind of information was being provided by plainclothes police who were more than likely in the area or those police who had infiltrated criminal groups.
That said, I saw a number of situations where police, standing on streetcorners outside of the security zone and seemingly not engaged in the search for specific individuals, stop and search what seemed to be random people who were doing nothing more than wearing black, carrying backpacks, long hair, piercings, and tattoos.
I'm usually quick to defend the guy on the ground who's making the call. I've been involved in real-life high-risk security operations and I know that there's usually more to every situation than meets the eye. It's from that perspective that I'll come on here and say that on Sunday I personally saw police action that I believe to be just plain wrong.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Hi Wonderbread.
Firstly, I wasn't at the G8/G20 so I cant speak directly to what you saw. You also aren't that specific about what you believe to be "just plain wrong"- so Im going to try and answer back in generality about what I THINK you may have saw.
As a police officer I routinely stop people I am suspicious of. During those stops I try and ascertain as much about an individual as I can. Furthermore, I also (depending on circumstance) talk my way into their backpacks or pockets. This is called a consent search and it is a completely legitimate police tactic. Police become pretty slick about them and I am proud to say that I'm almost as good as a used car salesman to get that consent.
The police officers in this area would be at a heightend level of suspicion of pretty much everyone who could potentially be a nogoodnik. I would expect that the individuals searched (consent or otherwise were of a certain........type and not just regular folks walking their babies? I do not support arbitrary search and detainment. I do however use everything Im legally allowed to do to ensure that I am get my job done. Within a framework as supported by law.
With regards to this controversial non-law. Ive been looking for the actual law as its written to have a look at how this may have been misinterpreted but I can't find it. Its seems shady at best so im weary until I see the actual law- Blair is pretty straightlaced for this kind of nonsense.
Firstly, I wasn't at the G8/G20 so I cant speak directly to what you saw. You also aren't that specific about what you believe to be "just plain wrong"- so Im going to try and answer back in generality about what I THINK you may have saw.
As a police officer I routinely stop people I am suspicious of. During those stops I try and ascertain as much about an individual as I can. Furthermore, I also (depending on circumstance) talk my way into their backpacks or pockets. This is called a consent search and it is a completely legitimate police tactic. Police become pretty slick about them and I am proud to say that I'm almost as good as a used car salesman to get that consent.
The police officers in this area would be at a heightend level of suspicion of pretty much everyone who could potentially be a nogoodnik. I would expect that the individuals searched (consent or otherwise were of a certain........type and not just regular folks walking their babies? I do not support arbitrary search and detainment. I do however use everything Im legally allowed to do to ensure that I am get my job done. Within a framework as supported by law.
With regards to this controversial non-law. Ive been looking for the actual law as its written to have a look at how this may have been misinterpreted but I can't find it. Its seems shady at best so im weary until I see the actual law- Blair is pretty straightlaced for this kind of nonsense.
Similar threads
