GostHacked Posted June 4, 2011 Report Posted June 4, 2011 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2011/05/07/ontario-mcguinty-g20.html More than 1,100 people were arrested and detained during the G20 weekend in what Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin called a mass violation of civil rights.The Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the New Democrats and the Progressive Conservatives have all called on McGuinty to apologize for the secret law his government passed regarding police powers during the G20 weekend. Now, it really does not matter who won't apologize for the secret G20 law ... because. http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/29/police-given-no-special-powers-during-g20-province/ The Ontario government says police were never granted special powers to detain and arrest people who came within five metres of the G20 security perimeter.The Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services insists a change to the Public Works Protection Act, legislation that governs most public space in Ontario, that was made behind closed doors by Premier Dalton McGuinty’s cabinet on June 2, applied only to the inside of the security fence. Our government thinks we are complete fucking idiots, and some of us genuinely are. Because they cannot understand what is going on here. How can anyone apologize for secret laws that were never passed and no special powers given to the police in the first place. The fast one has been pulled over anyone not paying attention to this. Many of us here have. Many of us here are angry that many had their rights violated. So just as a little recap for the ADHD crowd. Special powers granted. (before summit) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2010/06/25/g20-new-powers.html No special powers granted. (after summit) http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/830030--no-extra-powers-granted-to-police-during-g20-summit-liberals McGuinty won't apologize for the secret laws. (almost a year later) http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/QPeriod/20110601/g20-public-hearings-110601/ So which one of the above is true? Or are they all lies? I think most of you can figure this out. Quote
Saipan Posted June 4, 2011 Report Posted June 4, 2011 Why would McGuinty apologize while many still blame Harper? As a good lawyer he'll happily take a free ride Quote
Tilter Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 Why would McGuinty apologize while many still blame Harper? As a good lawyer he'll happily take a free ride Why should ANYONE in ANY government apologize for making laws that arrest hoodlums who destroy private and public propertyY The ones who need to apologize are the professional protesters who were there as they usually are anywhere they can publicize how much of an asshole each of them can be. Do we see any one of these idiots coming forth with the cash to replace the windows, police cars, private & public property they so happily destroyed? If they were unmasked at the time would they danced so joyously atop those Black & whites? Have the parents of these hoodlums came forth with the bux to repay those people who suffered financial loss? Why should the public have to foot the bill for the cost of protection for any official at a conference anywhere in the world and why should anyone feel guilty about bopping a few heads at the incident--- you have to get the attention of these idiots and sometimes it's necessary to break the odd 2X4 across the back of a few blockheads to do so. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 5, 2011 Author Report Posted June 5, 2011 Why should ANYONE in ANY government apologize for making laws that arrest hoodlums who destroy private and public propertyY ........ You are missing the point of the thread. You've been lied to. Quote
Jack Weber Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 Why should ANYONE in ANY government apologize for making laws that arrest hoodlums who destroy private and public propertyY The ones who need to apologize are the professional protesters who were there as they usually are anywhere they can publicize how much of an asshole each of them can be. Do we see any one of these idiots coming forth with the cash to replace the windows, police cars, private & public property they so happily destroyed? If they were unmasked at the time would they danced so joyously atop those Black & whites? Have the parents of these hoodlums came forth with the bux to repay those people who suffered financial loss? Why should the public have to foot the bill for the cost of protection for any official at a conference anywhere in the world and why should anyone feel guilty about bopping a few heads at the incident--- you have to get the attention of these idiots and sometimes it's necessary to break the odd 2X4 across the back of a few blockheads to do so. Huh? I understand your frustration and outrage at the destructive idiots who hijacked the whole affair last summer,but when laws are passed in secret giving police sweeping powers of arrest THEN the government who secretly passed these laws OPENLY LIES ABOUT IT..We've got a larger,and far more pervasive,problem than a bunch of idiots with too much time on thier hands... I would think a staunch conservative,such as yourself (doubtlessly wanting to stand up for individual freedom against the heavy handed power of the state),would easily understand this... Or are you more of an authoritarian conservative type?? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
jacee Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 ... why should anyone feel guilty about bopping a few heads at the incident--- you have to get the attention of these idiots and sometimes it's necessary to break the odd 2X4 across the back of a few blockheads to do so. Unfortunately they removed their ID and bopped the heads of innocent people. Quote
Saipan Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 You are missing the point of the thread. You've been lied to. Prove it. Quote
Saipan Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 Unfortunately they removed their ID and bopped the heads of innocent people. ID of both the police and protesters should be enforced by the law. And anyone covering face - be it police, protesters, other fanatics, male or female.... should be arrested whether it's inside the bank or anywhere else.. Quote
Tilter Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 You are missing the point of the thread. You've been lied to. No, I watched a bunch of wastrels do about 500,000 bux damage to property not their own. Dream all you want but if you can't blame the mob that did the damage you are one of the bunch there. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 No, I watched a bunch of wastrels do about 500,000 bux damage to property not their own. Dream all you want but if you can't blame the mob that did the damage you are one of the bunch there. You've got to be kidding me. You're worried about a few hundred thousand (not even sure where you get that number) in property damage over innocent civilians being detained and physically assaulted? So let me get this straight, if I beat the shit out of your wife that would be much less egregious than stealing her purse? Quote
WIP Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 How is it that all of these rightwing freedomlovers are so quick to put security and patriotism and just plain fear, ahead of individual rights and freedom? And, they are willing to pay any price when it comes to policing...in case anyone missed the overtime charges that out-of-town police billed us for. My main objection isn't the costs of policing though; it's secret laws, unlawful detentions, police in full body armor not wearing identification etc.. The G8 G20 Summit looks like a test run for our future police state, where all signs of civil disobedience are brutally suppressed. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
WWWTT Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 ID of both the police and protesters should be enforced by the law. And anyone covering face - be it police, protesters, other fanatics, male or female.... should be arrested whether it's inside the bank or anywhere else.. Actually it is the law for people to carry identification with them when they are in public.However any public citizen does have to show anyone there identification.Ironic. I also believe that there are laws in regards to covering your face in public but I am unsure of specific details. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Shwa Posted June 5, 2011 Report Posted June 5, 2011 So which one of the above is true? Or are they all lies? I think most of you can figure this out. OK, so let's: Public Works Protection Act Powers of guard or peace officer3.A guard or peace officer, (a) may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise; ( may search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter a public work or a vehicle in the charge or under the control of any such person or which has recently been or is suspected of having been in the charge or under the control of any such person or in which any such person is a passenger; and © may refuse permission to any person to enter a public work and use such force as is necessary to prevent any such person from so entering. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 3. Refusal to obey guard, etc.5.(1)Every person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction made under this Act by a guard or peace officer, and every person found upon a public work or any approach thereto without lawful authority, the proof whereof lies on him or her, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $500 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than two months, or to both. Arrest (2)A guard or peace officer may arrest, without warrant, any person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction of a guard or peace officer, or who is found upon or attempting to enter a public work without lawful authority. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 5. If I am looking at the law, as it currently stands, what the police did was not unlawful and was in keeping with the Act. The Solicitor General and OPP Chief can appoint "guards" who have sweeping powers to arrest. Not that in the definitions, a "highway" basically includes and any street or building and is considered a "public work." I am not saying it was the right thing to so, but McGinty had the Act at his disposal, not need for any secret laws. So I don't understand where this "inside the security fence" report comes from. Clearly this is not the case with the currect Act since it applies to any street. It is possible that these "special powers" and "secret laws" are a media fabrication of sorts? Because from a read of the Act, the government already had sweeping powers to arrest and detain. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 How can anyone apologize for secret laws that were never passed and no special powers given to the police in the first place. Indeed, how does someone apologise for what neither existed nor happened? It would seem they can't; or, at least, can't do so honestly. So, what is it you're looking for? Further, why is this in the Federal Politics section? Quote
GostHacked Posted June 6, 2011 Author Report Posted June 6, 2011 Indeed, how does someone apologise for what neither existed nor happened? It would seem they can't; or, at least, can't do so honestly. So, what is it you're looking for? What I hope to gain out of this, is to make people aware of this. You ARE going to see this kind of thing here in Canada during the next summit or whatever is hosted in Canada. Further, why is this in the Federal Politics section? Because I put it there. Again, we are being lied to. And the realy scary part is that many here don't seem to have a problem with it. I guess they might work for the other team here. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 6, 2011 Author Report Posted June 6, 2011 No, I watched a bunch of wastrels do about 500,000 bux damage to property not their own. Dream all you want but if you can't blame the mob that did the damage you are one of the bunch there. There was another mob there during the summit, who are the real crooks. The leaders of the G8/G20. The security cost over a billion ... $1,000,000,0000 CND, ..... that is the real crime committed to protect these bums that are stealing from our countries. Special powers .. no special powers, and someone won't apologize for special powers that were granted to them, but never granted to them ........ GET IT YET?? Quote
g_bambino Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 What I hope to gain out of this, is to make people aware of this. You want to make people aware of what doesn't exist? Why? Because I put it there. That just reiterates the fact that led to the question: why did you put it there? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 You want to make people aware of what doesn't exist? Why? Because Infowars and PrisonPlanet said so. http://www.prisonplanet.com/police-lied-about-law-demanding-g20-protesters-show-id.html Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted June 6, 2011 Author Report Posted June 6, 2011 Because Infowars and PrisonPlanet said so. http://www.prisonplanet.com/police-lied-about-law-demanding-g20-protesters-show-id.html Actually, it's because CTV, CBC and the National Post say so. Damn you plug him more than I do. Avid listener are you? Quote
Shwa Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 There was another mob there during the summit, who are the real crooks. The leaders of the G8/G20. The security cost over a billion ... $1,000,000,0000 CND, ..... that is the real crime committed to protect these bums that are stealing from our countries. Special powers .. no special powers, and someone won't apologize for special powers that were granted to them, but never granted to them ........ GET IT YET?? To me there is a difference between actual cost and what is budgeted. I believe the security was budgeted for a billion. Do you have any citation to show that it actually cost that much? Let's take a look at this news story from the Star: Out-of-town cops reaped millions for G20 work All of the 278 Montreal police officers, for instance, were paid double-time for all their work during the summit, earning a total of $3,342,578, almost half the $7 million cost to hire 657 officers from 17 Canadian police forces.... Spokeswoman Julie Gagnon said in an emailed statement the agency still came in $4 million under budget: The RCMP had forecast paying $11 million to “partners” for supplemental policing needs. ... The Toronto Police Service’s own G20 costs were $76 million, 38.7 per cent less than the originally projected costs of $124 million. Security costs for the G8/G20 totalled at least $676 million. at least... another educated guesstimate. And where did that $676 million go Ghosthacked? Back into the economy perhaps? I am not saying it was right and I am not saying the use of the Public Works Protection Act was right. But at this point, no secret laws, no billion dollars spent. One thing is for certain however, is that there is a lot of hyperbole surrounding the whole event. Quote
Saipan Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) There was another mob there during the summit, who are the real crooks. The leaders of the G8/G20. Yes, when the leaders of free democratic countries meet we board our windows and barricade our doors. They could be very dangerous. Edited June 6, 2011 by Saipan Quote
Saipan Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 There was another mob there during the summit, who are the real crooks. The leaders of the G8/G20. The security cost over a billion ... $1,000,000,0000 CND, What a shame, eh! It didn't have to cost ANYTHING if all people were civilized. We still have the human debris among us like we've seen during the LA riots. Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) My favourite part was when the media outlets used quotations on "secret". Because it wasn't a secret law at all and was already in existance. The context is somewhat inaccurate. The law has been in existence for years in Ontario to give police the power to detain people on government property, it was authorized for the area so it could be applied. Edited June 6, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
g_bambino Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 My favourite part was when the media outlets used quotations on "secret".Because it wasn't a secret law at all and was already in existance. There was also no secret amendment to the act; Acts of Parliament can only be amended by parliament itself, not by Order-in-Council, as the articles claim. This is why I asked GH what it was he thought he was making us aware of. Is it a secret act that never existed? A secret amendment to an act that never happened? Or an act that's been in the known statute books for the last 60 years? He can't seem to explain, though. Still no explanation as to why he felt it right to put this in the Federal Politics section, either. I suspect he thinks this all has something to do with Harper, ultimately. But GH won't dispel that suspicion. Quote
Shwa Posted June 6, 2011 Report Posted June 6, 2011 The context is somewhat inaccurate. The law has been in existence for years in Ontario to give police the power to detain people on government property, it was authorized for the area so it could be applied. From my read of the Act, which was cited above, it seems that roads, streets and any attached buildings are also considered "public works" meaning that police have the power to detain people on a street or in a public park. Quote
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.