ivan astikov, why is it the police’s fault as to what others may choose to do? The responsibility for any person’s actions lies with them. Yes, people can be influenced in their actions, but unless you can prove that the police did the deed, or that they put a gun to someone’s head to light cars on fire or smash windows then the responsibility for those actions lies squarely with the perpetrators. They chose to be there, they chose to do what they did.
Who’s arguing against any of that? All I’m doing is showing there is room for suspicious thoughts about police behaviour in “crowd-control” situations, even based on the admittedly limited information presented thus far.
That’s not the way life works. It’s your job to prove a positive assertion. Negatives can’t really be proven. You made the accusation, so back it up.
There’s no “alternative” explanation needed because you have provided no evidence that such a thing happened in Toronto. I’m suspicious of everyone and everything, but without EVIDENCE, what’s to be suspicious of?
You are welcome, of course, to provide us with evidence that the police in Toronto planted agents provocateurs in the crowd.
According to eyewitnesses on the scene, yes, the drivers were beset by hostile people, though I wouldn’t call them “activists.” An “activist” to me is someone who takes positive action for a social or political purpose; the people who burned the cars were just criminals.
I’ve been thinking about this, and my conclusion is that if anyone was prevented from reporting about their experiences after the immediate police crisis was over, then they’d have a leg to stand on, complaining about their free speech being curtailed. As it was, when you have a big, violent protest going on, yeah, things are not going to be as they normally are.
You know what normally happens after you ignore the commands of a police officer on the job? You get taken down by a police officer on the job. The guy who obeyed their commands didn’t get punched, I notice. As for excessive brutality, that’s entirely possible, and if it happened, it shouldn’t have, but ignoring the commands of police officers in a pressure-cooker situation like this is going to have fairly predictable results.
Yeah, its almost like this Rosenfeld dude wanted to be arrested so he could write a story about it. Nah. What was I thinking?
The G20 in Toronto is over, but it is not over until many of these questions are answered by those in command.
Why were citizens surrounded by full riot police at Queen/Spadina for 4 hours in heavy rain and not allowed to leave until it was known that it was being broadcast on LIVE TV for everyone to see. I realize there may have been some bad people within the group, but arrest them and let the others go.
I see it all the time in our city when a fire breaks out in an apartment building, the city sends buses within the hour to keep the residents in comfort, why did it take 4 hours for buses to arrive on Sunday night?
Why is it that some police officers had their name tags removed or blackened out during the G20 as reported in the Toronto Star?
There were many officers that I am sure did not like what was going on during the G20, why have they not come forward anonymously and given their side of the story? The good officers may be inclined to quit but please do not we need you.
Why were the people sitting at an intersection RUSHED by police while they sang O’Canada?
These questions and many others need to be answered by those in charge, we don’t need the continuous “stock answers” that we keep hearing. This is why we need an independent inquiry and NOW. I believe I know why they don’t want an inquiry, because these tough questions will be asked, and the powers that be, do not want to disclose this information.
I’m sure we all remember this saying/story …
@dandmb50 - We must not become complacent and give up our Charter rights, ever, it’s a slippery slop.
Many people think the G20 is over and just forget about it and let it go. But we must NOT. How does the story go … The military came forward and shut down the Jew that was peacefully protesting and arrested him, then they got away with it, so they came and took away the Christian for peacefully preaching on the street, arrested and took him away and nobody said anything. Then they came for me, and I wish I had spoken up earlier when they took away the Jew and the Christian. We better all wake up and not let this happen to any of us because we may end up in Torontonomo Bay. Detention Centre.
From what I understood we spent over a billion dollars so that people could protest. If they really wanted to stop you from protesting it would have only cost a few hundred dollars in bullets. Seems to me your rights are safe.
This. Twice.
Here is a link to a page describing suspicions of agents provocateurs amongst the rioters. This was sent to my by an old friend with whom I have over the years had many debates over protestor v police incidents. He has maintained that the cops in these situations use agents provocateurs to create a situation where the general public will calmly accept widespread arrests. I used to dismiss this as tinfoil hattery, but ever since the incident in Quebec, how can I dismiss out of hand the charges? Once it has happened, saying “there is no way the police would do this” loses a lot of validity.
He also sent me this link. I am not comfortable with the action of the police in this video, but given what had already happened in TO I suppose it is understandable. However, the possibility that the police themselves provided the justification for this type of response absolutely exists. I don’t know what to think anymore.
I apologize if these links have already been posted, I really only quickly skimmed the thread.
To what end? Why are the police looking for excuses to arrest people when they could go out any Friday or Saturday night and pick up any number of drunk drivers with a lot less controversy?
To what end? I have no idea. Why did the police in Quebec have officers dressed like anarchists preparing to throw rocks? Again, no idea. That’s my point. I used to be able to say “Whatever, the police wouldn’t do that. Why would they?” But I can’t anymore, since the police, in at least one case in Canada, have done that.
Cite?
There’s not an iota of actual evidence in this link. Not so much as a smidgen. It also gets some of the key facts wrong, I might add.
The evidence as presented is “Hey, look, that guy has Nike clothing on, and no anarchist would wear Nike clothing!” That’s risible and stupid.
Someone already posted the video link. There is no denying that is is a cop dressed as an anarchist with a rock in his hand. I will admit that my characterization of the intention of the officer in question is false, but I’m afraid that it does not look good on the police from where I stand.
And RickJay, I agree that there is no evidence in that link. I never claimed there was. All I said was my ability to dismiss such claims with conviction has been quite hampered by a Surete du Quebec officer with a rock in his hand being outed at a protest. You wanna call something risible and stupid, I’d say that action fits.
I might be crossing the line here with this suggestion, but maybe, just maybe, the cop is an anarchist (assuming he is a cop). Maybe he is an anarchist who seeks to undermine the system from within by being a cop. All sorts of explanations are possible. Until you give us a plausible reason for the police doing this, something that makes sense, then there isn’t much of a conspiracy here to deny people rights.
OK. He is a cop, there is no denying that. He is a cop with a rock in his hand dressed as a typical anarchist, in the company of two other cops dressed as anarchists. Outside of that, you are correct, all sorts of explanations are possible. Your suggestion sounds like a Chuck Palahniuk novel, albeit one of the better ones.
I am in no position to provide a plausible reason why there would be an on duty police officer masquerading as an anarchist clutching a rock at a protest. All I’m saying is that is has happened, making claims that such things do happen a lot more credible IMHO. What things you may ask? On duty police officers pretending to be anarchists, dressing the part, and arming themselves with rocks.
This, it seems to me, is skating dangerously close to “my post is my cite” territory. Do you have anything more substantial to back up your claim?
Here, for example, is a report in a reputable news source of how police infiltrated the Hell’s Angels, and what they did with the information gained. Unless you have a similar cite describing how police infiltrated the anarchists in order to incite the crowd to the point where a heavy-handed police response was justified, I would suggest your assertion as to who is a cop with a rock in his hand and who is an ordinary anarchist with a rock in his hand, is nothing more than guessing. In other words, you may be right, but until you can prove your assertion, you’re only speculating.
Aw hell Spoons- I apologize. The video was linked to earlier in the thread, and I’ve just been operating under the assumption that people knew what I was talking about. Just to be clear, this video is not from the G20.
To further be clear- the Surete de Quebec, after some denial, finally admitted that the three men in the video were on duty officers. They denied that they were agents provocateurs, but there is no denying that one of them has a rock in his hand for the entire video. By no means a smoking gun, draw your own conclusions.
LEO’s are The Good Guys; they don’t do bad shit, except on the odd occasion to Bad People Who Obviously Deserved It, m’kay?
No one said the police were smart. In my experience, they aren’t. Luckily for them, most criminals are even stupider or less experienced.
I still don’t know why they’d deliberately start riots. To what end? Peaceful protests don’t get much air time, so starting a riot would only benefit the protesters…Well, unless the police are looking to use this as an excuse to get their budgets increased, but the blowback if that was found to be true would be truly staggering.