g_bambino Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 You just described the G20 leaders. Really? There was no forewarning or planning in advance of their meeting in Toronto? Quote
GostHacked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Really? There was no forewarning or planning in advance of their meeting in Toronto? Listen, the riots happened when the G20 leaders were a couple hundred KMs north of Toronto. There was no threat to them, because they decided to go somewhere else for a day while protesters took to the streets. The cops were told to back off .. that is suspicious ..... oh which reminds me of another G# summit.I more than suspect the thugs that trashed the police cars and shops were provocateurs, just like what we saw in Montebello Quebec. It was ADMITED by the police after they were caught in their lies, that the provocateurs were COPS. that is 100% factual. Now the other important thing, and this affects your basic right to protest whatever the hell it is you want to protest in the future, is the special powers that were enacted upon but NEVER GRANTED to the police. All of our basic rights were violated that day, because this sets a precedent for this kind of bullshit to happen in the future. I did not participate in the protests, but now I wish I had. But regardless of me NOT participating in the protests, MY rights were violated. Because those rights belong to all of us as citizens. Quote
maple_leafs182 Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Listen, the riots happened when the G20 leaders were a couple hundred KMs north of Toronto. There was no threat to them, because they decided to go somewhere else for a day while protesters took to the streets. The cops were told to back off .. that is suspicious ..... oh which reminds me of another G# summit.I more than suspect the thugs that trashed the police cars and shops were provocateurs, just like what we saw in Montebello Quebec. It was ADMITED by the police after they were caught in their lies, that the provocateurs were COPS. that is 100% factual. Now the other important thing, and this affects your basic right to protest whatever the hell it is you want to protest in the future, is the special powers that were enacted upon but NEVER GRANTED to the police. All of our basic rights were violated that day, because this sets a precedent for this kind of bullshit to happen in the future. I did not participate in the protests, but now I wish I had. But regardless of me NOT participating in the protests, MY rights were violated. Because those rights belong to all of us as citizens. I drove from Winnipeg to Toronto to protest, I did not see any violence take place. I did however see three lines deep of police blocking intersections to allow bus fulls of police to drive by, they had to be trying to intimidate us there. They had police shoulder to shoulder within a fence circling a building when protesters were 10 feet away from the fence, nobody was charging the fence. They did not need even a quarter of the police that they had there. Quote │ _______ [███STOP███]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ :::::::--------------Conservatives beleive ▄▅█FUNDING THIS█▅▄▃▂- - - - - --- -- -- -- -------- Liberals lie I██████████████████] ...◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙'(='.'=)' ⊙
g_bambino Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Listen, the riots happened when the G20 leaders were a couple hundred KMs north of Toronto... [etc., etc.] Not only is that wrong, it and the rest of your words are also irrelevant to the line of conversation. We're discussing people gathering "wherever and whenever they want in protest". [+] Edited February 28, 2011 by g_bambino Quote
GostHacked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Not only is that wrong, it and the rest of your words are also irrelevant to the line of conversation. We're discussing people gathering "wherever and whenever they want in protest". [+] So the fact that people's rights were violated means nothing to you? You think that is irrelevant? Yeah, glad you are not making the rules. Freedom to protest and lawful assembly should not require me to get a permit to enter the free speech zone. We should be able to gather and protest where ever and whenever we want. If not, then we stop being the 'free' society we claim to be. Quote
Scotty Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Listen, the riots happened when the G20 leaders were a couple hundred KMs north of Toronto. There were no riots! A few dozen skinny punks in black wandered down a street commiting acts of vandalism. But so far as I know they didn't attack anyone, and were never a danger to anyone but inanimate objects. The police, on the other hand, attacked people indiscriminately - perhaps you meant the Police Riots? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
GostHacked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) There were no riots! A few dozen skinny punks in black wandered down a street commiting acts of vandalism. But so far as I know they didn't attack anyone, and were never a danger to anyone but inanimate objects. The police, on the other hand, attacked people indiscriminately - perhaps you meant the Police Riots? Sure I'll agree that my use of the term 'riots' is too harsh for what went on. Small patches of provocateurs caused all the ruckus. The crack down due to those 'special powers' was one of those way over the top responses. Police riots... i can agree to that. Edited February 28, 2011 by GostHacked Quote
Scotty Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Not only is that wrong, it and the rest of your words are also irrelevant to the line of conversation. We're discussing people gathering "wherever and whenever they want in protest". [+] And why are you discussing THAT? That wasn't the case in Toronto, where large fences were erected to keep people well away from the gathering. Thus people were protesting in the streets, and this was known by the authorities, and permitted. Only a few people broke any laws - excluding the police, who broke laws all weekend long with apparent impunity. In fact, the illegal behaviour of the so-called 'blackshirts' paled in comparison to the criminal activity of the police as the former's violence was directed at inanimate objects while the latter vented their anger at human beings. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
g_bambino Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) So the fact that people's rights were violated means nothing to you? I neither said nor indicated that such a thing means nothing to me. What I've been talking about only is the fact that people do not, nor should, have the right to form a horde and take over a public or private space whenever they want. We should be able to gather and protest where ever and whenever we want. If not, then we stop being the 'free' society we claim to be. Wrong. You still assume freedom only applies to those who participate in spontaneous and disruptive protests; you're giving no consideration to the other people in society who care either very little or not at all for whatever cause the gang's got themselves worked up about and their freedom to use a road, sidewalk, park, mall, factory, or whatever. That kind of cavalier attitude by one party towards all the other individuals who live in the same society is only going to agitate and lead to conflict; it's not democracy, it's mob rule, and those not in the mob don't take kindly to having their rights undermined by an obviously self-rigteous, inconsiderate gang. Democracy allows for people to have differing opinions, but it also requires that those who disagree with something still have respect for their opponents and, especially, for those who don't care one way or the other and would just like to go about their daily lives without unexpected disruption. If one wants to mount a protest of a few people on a sidewalk where there'll still be enough room for non-interested people to move around, fine. If one organises a larger demonstration with the involvement of the appropriate authorities and gives enough time to notify the general public of the location and duration of the march or rally, fine. But actions like shutting down a railroad without notice, taking over a highway on a whim, occupying a major road on impulse and indefinitely, or storming a conference room at city hall is not acceptable in a civilised, democratic society. [c/e] Edited February 28, 2011 by g_bambino Quote
Saipan Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Rights of people WERE violated. All those who had to put up with this "demonstration" about nothing, all the store owners who lost LOT of money. They should be FULLY compensated by those who were proven vandals. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 The discussion should be about the black bloc dirt bags. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
cybercoma Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) The discussion should be about the black bloc dirt bags. You mean these guys? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAfzUOx53Rg&feature=related Edited February 28, 2011 by cybercoma Quote
Shakeyhands Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 That is indefensible, you're right. I'm just not fond of the way that people are using this as an excuse to attack the Harper Government. That wasn't their thing. How do you figure it wasn't? His gathering right? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
cybercoma Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 How do you figure it wasn't? His gathering right? Billion dollar gathering: money out of the pockets of the people that were assaulted. Quote
Smallc Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 How do you figure it wasn't? His gathering right? Yes, his mandatory gathering...and the executive itself wasn't in charge of planning security. Quote
GostHacked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Posted February 28, 2011 Good stuff Cybercoma. People are too easy to forget that cops do mingle among the protesters to keep an eye on them. But we have seen it a few times where the cops themselves try to initiate violence. Now what would be the purpose of that eh? Quote
Saipan Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 But we have seen it a few times where the cops themselves try to initiate violence. We did? Quote
Scotty Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 The discussion should be about the black bloc dirt bags. They broke the law. They broke windows. Now compare that to another guy, also wearing black, who struck a man playing tourist from behind, without provocation, dislocating his shoulder and breaking his arm, then tied him up, dragged him across the ground, threw him into a car, and kept him in a cold cage all night without medical treatment, or even water. What should happen to him? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Shakeyhands Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAfzUOx53Rg&feature=related Posted right here Saipan. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Shakeyhands Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 Now compare that to another guy, also wearing black, who struck a man playing tourist from behind, without provocation, dislocating his shoulder and breaking his arm, then tied him up, dragged him across the ground, threw him into a car, and kept him in a cold cage all night without medical treatment, or even water. What should happen to him? I wonder if the SIU has footage that the police took. I noticed one officer filming where they encircled that group at Spadina and whereever. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Saipan Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 Posted right here Saipan. Posted what EXACTLY? Quote
Shakeyhands Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 Posted what EXACTLY? Come on, you can't possibly be that obtuse. Can you? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Saipan Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 Name calling won't help you. You need to come up with some REAL answer. Quote
Shakeyhands Posted March 1, 2011 Report Posted March 1, 2011 Name calling won't help you. You need to come up with some REAL answer. Saipan, so you are just being obtuse! Ok, whatever. The video's were posted twice, once just for you. If you choose to carry on here like that, your choice. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.