Protests, police provocateurs, masks, etc

[GostHacked]

I did. And I see people accusing them of trying to start a riot, but I see no proof that they were./quote]

Well it's quite obvious they were prevented from trying to start a riot.

Nothing that quote says that the police tried to incite violence or that they started a riot. It simply says that there were police disguised as demonstrators and that they wore bandanas and one was carrying a rock.

So if you saw a few people with bandanas and rocks in their hands, what would be the first thing that comes your mind, taking into account that you have no idea if they are cops or not.

1 - They are anarchists and up to no good.

or

2 - They are cops trying to catch the baddies.

There is nothing there to suggest anything other than undercover cops within the crowd of protesters. Fact is, the protest organizers can't "order" anyone to do anything; they were not helping the situation. They should have immediately summoned the police and let the police handle it.

He did not have to summon the police, they were right there with rocks and bandanas! You think crying to the police because of police tactics is going to get anyone anywhere? Considering nothing was really done after the fact that they were found to be cops.

I imagine that there are quite a few videos out there and I don't have the time or the desire to watch all of them, but from what I have seen, there's nothing to suggest anything other than police officers undercover as protesters, which is something altogether different from inciting violence, trying to get the crowd to start some violence, and your claim that it was their job to get people to riot.

I did not say it was their job to incite violence (however it may have been one of their goals) I said it was a tactic that they do, and have used. It's the tactic I do not like.

[Signals.Cpl]

ummmm.... check your atlas. Quebec is in Canada.

Sorry I missed a word in the REST OF CANADA.

[Guest American Woman]

At first, he was attempting to disarm someone who was starting a riot.

What makes you think he was starting a riot? I don't see any evidence of that.

This is completely justified!

I doubt if it's legal in Canada to take the law into your own hands. He had no right to put his hands on them, and until he did, I saw no aggressive behavior.

He thought these guys were going to attack property or the cops and he was attempting to prevent this. Then they realized that these were cops...

If I think a neighbor walking down the street is going to do something, you think that gives me the right to get physical with them? To put my hands on them? It doesn't. At any rate, you start out saying he was "attempting to disarm someone who was starting a riot," and now you admit that he "thought" they were going to attack property ....... which means they actually weren't.

I think it is perfectly justified to attempt to disarm/unmask rioters.

They weren't "rioters," and no matter how many times you put that spin on it, there's nothing to verify it. The video starts out with CEP President Dave Coles getting bent out of shape - and putting his hands on them. I'm just not seeing anything that confirms the accusations. A video of the cops' actions BEFORE Coles gets in their face, puts his hands on them, is what would be interesting and perhaps would confirm the claims. But I haven't seen any of that. I've only seen their reaction to Coles' provocation. Why is there no video of just the cops, before the run-in with Coles? Why wasn't any of that footage taken - or perhaps more likely, why wasn't that posted? - I find it hard to believe that there wasn't any footage taken prior to what we are seeing.

[GostHacked]

wishful Thinking

But it seems you agree with me in some way here.

If I said I will kill you, and you know in the past I have carried out my threat would you (a) Call the police and have them bait me in to starting something in a controlled environment thus being safe and secure while a dangerous person is removed from the situation or (b)hope for the best and try not to antagonize me even though I have said I will do it and have the history to prove that I intent to.

If you make a direct threat against me, knowing your history, I might be the kind that does not wait for police to detain you. They might be calling an ambulance at the least, the coroner at the most.

Do you support vaccines? You know the things where a doctor puts a virus in to you to prevent you from getting sick?

Irrelevant. Your vaccine analogy sucks.

As long as there is a legitimate belief that someone will cause violence police try to get the violent party to commit to action in once again a controlled environment where it is less dangerous for everyone.

Maybe you can show me where they controlled the actual violence that took place? Should not be hard to show... right?

Where is the precedent? Montebello? Different city, Different province, Different situation.

The only difference really, was the location where the summit took place. Although the much hated SPP was holding a summit in Montebello, with the leaders of Canada, US and Mexico attending. Before seeing the Montebello clip, people thought that police infiltration among protesters does not happen.

I find it hard to believe that the G20 protestors were so innocent seeing as wherever they go violence shortly follows. Either there is a worldwide police conspiracy to discredit the protestors, or there are groups within which use violent means to achieve a goal.

The media does try to marginalize protests and protesters. Calling them anti-government, when they are really anti-corruption, and opposed to much of the globalization that is taking place.

So why did the cops not try and stop the violence that took place on the Saturday before the Sunday Kettling of mostly innocent people? I am still waiting for an answer on that one.

[Guest American Woman]

AW: I imagine that there are quite a few videos out there and I don't have the time or the desire to watch all of them, but from what I have seen, there's nothing to suggest anything other than police officers undercover as protesters, which is something altogether different from inciting violence, trying to get the crowd to start some violence, and your claim that it was their job to get people to riot.

I did not say it was their job to incite violence (however it may have been one of their goals) I said it was a tactic that they do, and have used. It's the tactic I do not like.

This is exactly what you said:

The undercover cops, their job was to get people to riot.

[GostHacked]

This is exactly what you said:

Ahh you are correct. Maybe you do have some skills in reading comprehension. But you seem to miss the overall context of the thread where as an example, the Montebello police trying to do exactly that, incite violence.

But I am sure the masks, rocks and gloves were just accessories, and they wanted to be fashionable when rioting.

[Signals.Cpl]

Ahh you are correct. Maybe you do have some skills in reading comprehension. But you seem to miss the overall context of the thread where as an example, the Montebello police trying to do exactly that, incite violence.

But I am sure the masks, rocks and gloves were just accessories, and they wanted to be fashionable when rioting.

So your theory is that police in Montebello tried to incite a riot and failed therefore every time there is a riot it is the police causing it?

Why don't you answer this, every time there is a G8/G20 meeting there is violence different intensity of violence but violence all the same. So what is the common denominator in all those protests? Ill give you a tip, its not the police.

[g_bambino]

In this instance they got caught.

What does it matter they got caught other than they, and/or their wardrobe department, didn't do their jobs very well? It's no secret police send undercover officers in amongst certain bunches of anarchist protesters to try to provide opportunities for someone or someones else in the group to make a violent move or start a riot and/or to get inside observations on the group and/or certain members.

[Guest American Woman]

Ahh you are correct. Maybe you do have some skills in reading comprehension.

Wow. Way to admit you were wrong.

[g_bambino]

I am sure the masks, rocks and gloves were just accessories, and they wanted to be fashionable when rioting.

Haven't you just admitted there that the group the cops were in amongst were typical rioters? The police are dressed exactly like the group around them; they outfitted themselves that way to fit in with the anarchists, not the other way around. The only thing you mention that isn't common amongst everyone in that bunch is the rock; it can't be discerned from the video clip whether or not any of the protesters had a projectile or other implement for vandalism on them or not.

[Guest American Woman]

What does it matter they got caught other than they, and/or their wardrobe department, didn't do their jobs very well?

Actually, I'd say they did their jobs quite well since no one suspected that they were undercover cops. Their intent, I would assume, was to fit in with the crowd they were keeping under surveillance.

It's no secret police send undercover officers in amongst certain bunches of anarchist protesters to try to provide opportunities for someone or someones else in the group to make a violent move or start a riot and/or to get inside observations on the group and/or certain members.

What, exactly, do you think they were doing "to provide opportunities for someone or someone else in the group to make a violent move or start a riot...?" What makes you think they weren't simply there for surveillance or to be close by if trouble broke out? I see no evidence of them doing anything other than being there, dressed for the part - which is generally the idea when doing undercover work.

Edited May 15, 2012 by American Woman

[Rick]

So your theory is that police in Montebello tried to incite a riot and failed therefore every time there is a riot it is the police causing it?

Why don't you answer this, every time there is a G8/G20 meeting there is violence different intensity of violence but violence all the same. So what is the common denominator in all those protests?

The jackasses representing big business and corporate wealth keep having them, lavishing in luxury at our expense while spitting in the face of the working class and poor.

There's your common denominator.

And you wonder why people protest...

[Signals.Cpl]

The jackasses representing big business and corporate wealth keep having them, lavishing in luxury at our expense while spitting in the face of the working class and poor.

There's your common denominator.

And you wonder why people protest...

And it sure makes sense destroying the little mom and pop businesses I really love their logic and I love the way you back up criminals. Police officers have a job to do, its not their duty to decide who to support, there is a law and their job is to uphold it. Attacking small business and police does not bring you closer to achieving anything other then alienating a potential base of support.

The common denominator is the protestors, some of whom go from protest to protest in order to wreak havoc and in every case it is the police who receive the blame.

[g_bambino]

What, exactly, do you think they were doing "to provide opportunities for someone or someone else in the group to make a violent move or start a riot...?" What makes you think they weren't simply there for surveillance or to be close by if trouble broke out?

I didn't say with any certainty they were there to provide for other protesters opportunities for violence or starting a riot, as indicated by the "or" in the "and/or" before I said "to get inside observations on the group and/or certain members." I can't see anything that says for certain they were trying to lead any protesters on to being violent or rioting; but, it's known the police do so, as in other sting operations they conduct in different circumstances to catch different types of criminals.

[Rick]

The common denominator is the protestors, some of whom go from protest to protest in order to wreak havoc

Sounds a lot like what soldiers serving their fascist masters do...

[Signals.Cpl]

Sounds a lot like what soldiers serving their fascist masters do...

I woudent know, but do enlighten me from your experiences.

[Signals.Cpl]

Sounds a lot like what soldiers serving their fascist masters do...

Just to clarify I am assuming you never served seeing as you are NDP.

[WWWTT]

There's no record of what the police were doing to get arrested,

And there never will be.Unless of course someone independently taped and the footage gets released.

In Canada the crown and police somehow "misplace" evidence and "misword" statements.

An excellent example would be that poor Polish guy that was tasered to death at the Vancouver aeroport.

After that incident the police released a public report/statement.After the police report was well documented,a phone video surfaced contradicting the police report.

This happens far too often and the people who tape the questionable actions and release to the public are the real heroes!

If anyone in Canada sincerely believes the crown and/or police would ever stand up for constitutional rights is very naive!

WWWTT

[Rick]

Just to clarify I am assuming you never served seeing as you are NDP.

Correct, I refuse to stoop to associating with fascist right wing swine.

[Signals.Cpl]

Correct, I refuse to stoop to associating with fascist right wing swine.

You MUST hate looking in the mirror then

[Rick]

And there never will be.Unless of course someone independently taped and the footage gets released.

In Canada the crown and police somehow "misplace" evidence and "misword" statements.

An excellent example would be that poor Polish guy that was tasered to death at the Vancouver aeroport.

After that incident the police released a public report/statement.After the police report was well documented,a phone video surfaced contradicting the police report.

This happens far too often and the people who tape the questionable actions and release to the public are the real heroes!

If anyone in Canada sincerely believes the crown and/or police would ever stand up for constitutional rights is very naive!

WWWTT

Well said WWWT, if memory serves me correctly there was also a recent report issued on how rare it was for a cop to be charged and actually prosecuted once internal affairs had been involved. They're good at covering up for their own.

[Guest American Woman]

And there never will be.Unless of course someone independently taped and the footage gets released.

I can't imagine that no one shot any video footage before Coles got into the act. If it confirmed that the police were doing something illegal, criminal, I'm sure a video would be all over YouTube. The fact that there is no video confirming it leads me to believe that it didn't happen the way it's being presented.

In Canada the crown and police somehow "misplace" evidence and "misword" statements.

An excellent example would be that poor Polish guy that was tasered to death at the Vancouver aeroport.

Not sure what was "lost" regarding that case, the but evidence made its way to the internet - which sort of backs up what I am saying.

After that incident the police released a public report/statement.After the police report was well documented,a phone video surfaced contradicting the police report.

This happens far too often and the people who tape the questionable actions and release to the public are the real heroes!

Yet nothing is being released to confirm the "questionable actions" in this instance. I'm not saying the police always act in accordance with how they should act, but they certainly don't always NOT act as they should, either. 'No proof of the cops' actions = guilty cops' to so many; the 'little guy' can do no wrong and is automatically believed.

If anyone in Canada sincerely believes the crown and/or police would ever stand up for constitutional rights is very naive!

And anyone who believes that the crown and/or police never stand up for the constitutional rights is very jaded and biased.

[Signals.Cpl]

Well said WWWT, if memory serves me correctly there was also a recent report issued on how rare it was for a cop to be charged and actually prosecuted once internal affairs had been involved. They're good at covering up for their own.

You do realize police in Ontario are policed by a Civilian agency?

[Smallc]

This place is very quickly losing its charm.

[Signals.Cpl]

This place is very quickly losing its charm.

This thread had no charm to begin with, Mrs jacee started this up after spewing this bull in another forum.