Loser Protesters

[sharkman]

They don't have to personally justify the meeting to anybody. It is a global economy no matter what any leftist anti-capitalist thug thinks about it. Stamping one's feet or burning a cop car won't change it. Destroying store front windows won't change it. And doing the above in hopes of making the news won't change it.

On the subject matter of the meetings, it sounds like Obama is supporting the idea of more spending(and debt) to grow the economies while the majority of the other countries represented disagree. I hope they don't fall under Obama's spell like the Nobel folks did.

[Mr.Canada]

nt

Edited June 28, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[Muddy]

I disagree. In order to justify the spending on security, the meeting itself needs to be justified. That hasn't been done yet.

Point is well taken. I too thought the venue was in the wrong place. But that still does not justify thugs destroying public property,thats you and I, and private property of some poor sod who has their business destroyed and looted. So since it was in the wrong place still does not justify violence and does justify the police presence.

[capricorn]

Bollocks. Lets see property repair costs for other G8/20 sites. I'll bet that we wasted a lot of money.

If other countries who hosted such summits won't even come clean on how much they spent on security, what makes you think they'll be honest about their reparation costs?

[SF/PF]

They don't have to personally justify the meeting to anybody.

When they want taxpayers to cough up a billion dollars for their little shindig, your damn right they need to justify it.

It is a global economy no matter what any leftist anti-capitalist thug thinks about it.

Yep.. its a global economy. But that doesn't mean that the global economy is a net benefit to the people paying for this powwow. This country is in a deficit situation, and we're paying a billion dollars to host a meeting for a group that, given its own way, would see more jobs lost to third world nations?

[Muddy]

Who cares what cost other meeting were! I care about my streets and the violence here in this free country. Our freedom and democracy was undermined by a criminal element that would have just as likely as not attacked you or I if we had stood in their way of committing crimes. The right to legitimately protest was undermined this weekend. Put the blame where it belongs. On the thugs.

[Mr.Canada]

The protesters who were there didn't appear to be hard working individuals at all. Instead they want a hand out. They want to live for free on the taxpayers dime. They don't appear to have a cause at all and only wish to cause destruction and mayhem for mayhems sake.

[SF/PF]

The right to legitimately protest was undermined this weekend. Put the blame where it belongs. On the thugs.

The right to legitimately protest was undermined when protesters began being shoved into protest zones.

Yes...the thugs are, largely, responsible for the violence and vandalism.

And the government and organizers are responsible for wasting a billion dollars on a meeting that could have been held via video conferencing for.. a couple hundred bucks.. tops? Its unclear that the meeting would deliver value-for-money at a price tag of $200...

Lots of blame to go around.

[Topaz]

Why should the we, the citizens, have to pay dearly for a bunch of leaders, who only agree to disagree, PAY for their meetings? These meetings can't be THAT important, when you have the PM of UK and Germany, leaving the meeting only to watch the soccer game!! This G20 meeting was more about Harper than about the importance of the meeting. The meeting in Korea is suppose to be more important meeting than this one. IF, these meetings are so important, they should hold them at the UN and avoid most of what goes on during the meetings. What would have happened if some of the protesters in black did break through and managed to break through security and get into these meetings? Why don't these leaders arrange to have a few appointed protesters, address these leaders and then maybe we won't need all the security and the damage done.

[Muddy]

Why should the we, the citizens, have to pay dearly for a bunch of leaders, who only agree to disagree, PAY for their meetings? These meetings can't be THAT important, when you have the PM of UK and Germany, leaving the meeting only to watch the soccer game!! This G20 meeting was more about Harper than about the importance of the meeting. The meeting in Korea is suppose to be more important meeting than this one. IF, these meetings are so important, they should hold them at the UN and avoid most of what goes on during the meetings. What would have happened if some of the protesters in black did break through and managed to break through security and get into these meetings? Why don't these leaders arrange to have a few appointed protesters, address these leaders and then maybe we won't need all the security and the damage done.

Because we have a democracy and we have the right to elect our leaders to make these decisions. Right or wrong! We do not elect thugs to destroy your property and mine.

[bjre]

Because we have a democracy and we have the right to elect our leaders to make these decisions. Right or wrong! We do not elect thugs to destroy your property and mine.

then what? do you have to right to decide if the G20 should held in Toronto or not?

[sharkman]

Why should the we, the citizens, have to pay dearly for a bunch of leaders, who only agree to disagree, PAY for their meetings? These meetings can't be THAT important, when you have the PM of UK and Germany, leaving the meeting only to watch the soccer game!! This G20 meeting was more about Harper than about the importance of the meeting. The meeting in Korea is suppose to be more important meeting than this one. IF, these meetings are so important, they should hold them at the UN and avoid most of what goes on during the meetings. What would have happened if some of the protesters in black did break through and managed to break through security and get into these meetings? Why don't these leaders arrange to have a few appointed protesters, address these leaders and then maybe we won't need all the security and the damage done.

Why should we the people have to pay dearly because a group of pure idiots show up for nothing more than to damage property and cop cars? They should have brought in the army any shut them down at the first sign of unlawful protest.

You have no idea what business is being conducted behind closed doors. The press releases don't tell half the story. These kind of meetings have always needed to be face to face, if some don't like it, so what?

[sharkman]

The right to legitimately protest was undermined when protesters began being shoved into protest zones.

Yes...the thugs are, largely, responsible for the violence and vandalism.

And the government and organizers are responsible for wasting a billion dollars on a meeting that could have been held via video conferencing for.. a couple hundred bucks.. tops? Its unclear that the meeting would deliver value-for-money at a price tag of $200...

Lots of blame to go around.

No there is not lots of blame to go around. Just because you have little idea of what goes on at a G20 meeting, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. Protesters who have no goal besides property damage and other nonsense do not have the right to protest anything. Idiots.

[SF/PF]

You have no idea what business is being conducted behind closed doors. The press releases don't tell half the story. These kind of meetings have always needed to be face to face, if some don't like it, so what?

So have the meetings at the UN after general assembly meetings, do the dirty work fast, cheap, and easy.. and get on with it.

No billion dollar boondoggle, no subjugation of civil rights, no protesters or violence in the streets.

[g_bambino]

then what? do you have to right to decide if the G20 should held in Toronto or not?

How surprising that you should be oblivious to the concept of representative democracy.

[sharkman]

So have the meetings at the UN after general assembly meetings, do the dirty work fast, cheap, and easy.. and get on with it.

IF you don't like it, don't watch.

Edited June 28, 2010 by sharkman

[SF/PF]

No there is not lots of blame to go around. Just because you have little idea of what goes on at a G20 meeting, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. Protesters who have no goal besides property damage and other nonsense do not have the right to protest anything. Idiots.

Do you deny that the meeting could have been held more cheaply, easily, and safely in another location?

Even if we accept that these meetings are neccessary, a dubious claim in itself, I fail to see how one can support having such meetings in a location that requires the highest possible expenditure of tax payer money to foot the bill. Honestly.. can you think of another location in Canada that could possibly have cost more than this?

[bjre]

How surprising that you should be oblivious to the concept of representative democracy.

The problem is what is the percentage of the decisions that the "representative" made is same with yours?

To me, only a small amount in common.

Edited June 28, 2010 by bjre

[SF/PF]

IF you don't like it, don't watch.

I'm not watching it... but I'm footing a pretty ridiculous bill for it.

See how that works?

[capricorn]

Then the floodgates oped and dozens of prisoners were released one after the other.

Joshua Edgar, 18, said: "I'd do it again, I had a lot of fun and I made a lot of new friends."

When asked why he came to Toronto to protest, he pointed to his homemade backpack, a Canadian flag with a pot leaf on it, and said: "Well, I like marijuana, obviously."

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/g20/2010/06/27/14536141.html

Entertainment for young Joshua, compliments of the Canadian taxpayer. Betcha he'll wear his arrest as a badge of honour.

[g_bambino]

The problem is what is the percentage of the decisions that the "representative" made is same with yours?

That's not a problem for anyone except the decision maker come election time.

[sharkman]

Do you deny that the meeting could have been held more cheaply, easily, and safely in another location?

Even if we accept that these meetings are neccessary, a dubious claim in itself, I fail to see how one can support having such meetings in a location that requires the highest possible expenditure of tax payer money to foot the bill. Honestly.. can you think of another location in Canada that could possibly have cost more than this?

Yeah, I deny it. You've got 20 world leaders all needing a face to face in one location, and you've got idiots and whack-jobs who not only want to violently protest, you've got those who want them dead. You need security for both, and you need to put them up in a stately manner. How much are you personally paying for this? Nothing.

[bjre]

That's not a problem for anyone except the decision maker come election time.

That is the reason that makes many people unhappy.

[SF/PF]

Yeah, I deny it. You've got 20 world leaders all needing a face to face in one location, and you've got idiots and whack-jobs who not only want to violently protest, you've got those who want them dead. You need security for both, and you need to put them up in a stately manner. How much are you personally paying for this? Nothing.

And yet I offered an alternative that would cost virtually nothing. And your response was "IF you don't like it, don't watch it."

You don't make a lot of sense...

[Pliny]

As opposed to the corporate leaders of the G8/G20 who are intent on making us all equally.. rich?

Yes, believe it or not. It is up to someone else to make you poor or rich. We must forever be the spectator and I know it is hard to spectate without the essentials of life. There are two ways we can get them. Have someone give them to us or we take them. There is no other way except well...maybe producing more than we consume but that would mean leaving our comfy-chairs.

...and it would be better if there were some agency that did the taking legally. Can you think of one that could do that so we can just do as we should and just spectate.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Pliny