Friday, July 16, 2010

To serve and protect

Close
Closer
Munch !!
.


Recommend this post

5 comments:

  1. Is the angry woman in the first picture holding the collapsible baton supposed to be an anarchist or a plain clothes officer?

    What about the fellow in light-blue jeans and a gray shirt - there is a similarly dressed fellow behind him - are they too supposed to be a anarchists, or just plain clothes officers?

    They appear to be in the midst of folks wearing badges, so there are others in the picture who might be officers. The details are hard to see but they surely must all be officers, since there does not seem to be a movement to arrest the plain clothes folks.

    There is another indicator that they are officers: they are all holding the folding baton so that it is in the rear hand, with the lead hand in front as a defensive weapon. This is the standard tactic for many law enforcement officers.

    The collapsible baton in the picture is a prohibited weapon in Canada, as I understand it. These look much like the ASP 21" model, a weapon favored by police forces.

    In another picture, what is with the apparent officer with baton (note it is held to the rear again) who is wearing shorts?

    Is there a description of context for these photos? I did not see those shots in the video, but perhaps missed them.

    Regards

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  2. I did not notice initially that there were two videos. It is much clearer now who was a cop. Very, very suspicious goings on to be sure.

    The evidence here is just as compelling as it was at Montebello, but I have not seen any reports yet of the government being put on the defensive.

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  3. Police have a tactic where they can retrieve undercover officers to behind safe lines or by which they remove individuals targeted for arrest. (Backpack, phone number written on the arm (i.e. person expecting possible arrest) or whatever criteria police set. A flying squad explodes out from the police line and does a quick extraction with a number of people grabbing the subject while others hold everybody away. The whole group then return as one behind the safe line with the subject at the core of the moving group. Spectators probably don't know if a legitimate arrest has occurred or if police have simply "escorted" one of their own onto friendly ground without identifying the person as police. All those standing behind the bike cop line are obviously police, including the crazy lady, the bearded hillbilly type, bermuda shorts guy, others dressed all in black (?), etc.

    That one particular female reminded me of an out of control dog, racing from place to place, looking for something to bite.

    Wow. When did citizens lose the right of public assembly? I have no time for vandals and violent protesters but it shocks me to see peaceful demonstrators attacked, like those singing the national anthem and posing no risk of violence to anyone. They sure as hell weren't blocking traffic either because the streets were closed.

    The police didn't put maximum effort into arresting the violent property damagers, they seemed to prefer the easy targets, the folks merely present to express a political thought.

    The violent behavior of representatives of Canadian government, whether police, CSIS, Canadian Forces or hired thugs, proved that everyone's individual rights are at risk.

    This is what the NRA, the militia movement, survivalists and radical libertarians have been saying in the USA for years. I believe it is imperative to explain what happened in Toronto. Federal politicians must bend to this.

    I know that in Vancouver, the Olympic security people under the command of the RCMP prepared to behave the way they did in Toronto. The difference was that the Vancouver City Police took a different attitude the Toronto cops. VPD met with protest groups and held non-confrontational discussions beforehand. VPD cooperated with the BC Civil Liberties Association, which trained hundreds of observers, armed only with cameras and notebooks, who went to the demonstrations wearing bright orange shirts with ID. The RCMP wouldn't meet with volunteers who wanted to ensure peaceful protests. It's like they wanted confrontation. They got it in Toronto.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "To Protect and Serve" or "To Oppress and Enslave"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Norman,

    A bit after the fact, but I just found this news snippet:


    CEP’s Coles wants to unmask the smoking gun at Montebello summit
    By KJ Mullins.

    Dave Coles, the Union leader that busted the lid off of “agents provocateurs” operation at the Montebello summit, is working to find out who gave the agents their orders.

    The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union (CEP) will be agrueing on Monday to give Coles standing at the Quebec Police Ethics Committee. The Committee is investigating the police’s operation at the 2007 “Security and Prosperity Partnership” summit at Montebello, Québec. Cole stopped the provocateurs from inciting a riot during the Summit on August 20, 2007. The three people in question were dressed in black and wearing police issue boots. One of the men had a rock in his hand. The three were removed by the police from the crowd and the peaceful protest continued. It was confirmed after initial denial that by the SQ that the three were indeed SQ officers. The union is now working to find out who was behind the orders for that mission. “This is important because we suspect that a similar police operation was used against demonstrators at the recent G20 Summit in Toronto. If we find out who gave the orders at Montebello, it may give us a smoking gun for who issued the orders in Toronto,” says Coles. The Police Ethics Committee will hear the motion on Monday, July 26, 2010, at 9:30 am in Montreal, at 500 René-Levesque West, 6th Floor.


    Found at: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295044

    ReplyDelete

Courteous and relevant comments are welcome. Please use a consistent screen name so other readers can connect your contributions.