Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Conspiracy Chicks G-20 Misinfo or Disinfo?

page: 4
47
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoHierarchy
Who are these "hundreds" of witnesses that can state that police provocateurs were directly involved in either committing the acts or letting them happen?


Ok, slow down there buddy. First of all, did you even read anything I've written? When have I EVER claimed that there were actually agents provocateurs at the Toronto G20 protest? Unless I've suddenly stumbled into some alternate universe (which may very well be the case here on ATS
)I'm pretty sure the ENTIRE POINT OF THIS THREAD AND MY POSTS has been that, as of yet, THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE PROOF OF PROVOCATEURS!

And, again, had you read what I wrote, you would have understood that the hundreds of witnesses was loosely referring to all the people who saw first-hand the different events at the protest... ANARCHISTS INCLUDED!


As for the host of this series, he's actually got quite a number of episodes out and is fairly well known amongst Anarchist circles/viewers.


I don't doubt that either. My tongue-in-cheek comments regarding his "authenticity" were more a reaction to how sheerly ridiculous both your claim that the video actually debunked the provocateur theory as well as his complete lack of evidence or even a convincing argument for the same conclusion was. I'm sure for people that already agree with his politics, beliefs and version of what happened he's a hilarious and great show host. But for those of us who, let's say, aren't already Black Bloc adherents, he provides no reason nor documentary proof for anyone else to believe his claims.


If you'd rather listen to the mainstream media and the conspiracy theories of protesters who WEREN'T EVEN ON THE SCENE over the views of Anarchists who were actually there


Well, I'm pretty sure I've already suggested my views towards the MSM coverage, so I'll just chock this up to you (yet again) not actually reading my posts. But this second part makes a really good point! Come to think of it, in all the videos, photos, eye-witness accounts, etc, etc. that have come out from the protest there doesn't seem to actually be any protesters at the protest! Every video only shows heroic Black Bloc freedom fighters chasing down crying riot cops. I can't believe I never noticed before that there weren't any protesters "ON THE SCENE". (note to anyone else who is skimming my posts without actually reading them, I'M BEING SARCASTIC).

Continued next post...




[edit on 16-7-2010 by dangerouslogic]




posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by Nohierarchy
WHEN COPS BEAT THE SH** OUT OF PEACEFUL PROTESTERS, IT'S NOT THE FAULT OF ANARCHISTS.


Never said it was. In fact, I'd go even further and suggest that cops beating the crap out of protesters is... *drumroll* THE FAULT OF THE COPS AND THEIR HANDLERS.


WHEN THE MEDIA FAILS TO COVER A PROTEST PROPERLY/ACCURATELY, IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE ANARCHISTS.


Again, never said it was. Replace the word "cops" with "media" in my second sentence above.


THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THE WRONGDOING OF POLICE/MEDIA.


Yet once again, I never said there was. In fact I agree with you wholeheartedly.


And don't you dare scapegoat Anarchists who actually have the balls to fight back against a REAL aggressor.


Aww and we were just starting to agree!
So you are saying that the "REAL aggressor" was a couple of store windows, cop cars and journalists' camera lenses? Come on. If those "Anarchists" truly had "balls" and were targetting the "REAL aggressor" then they would have been engaging the cops who were attacking and arresting protesters, or perhaps even go after the people who this whole thing was actually about: the G20 attendees. Seriously, come on.


Black bloc tactics have been proven effective time and time again.


I SAID COME ON! They've "been proven effective time and time again" at accomplishing what, exactly? Giving the police an excuse in the public's mind to beat up and arrest innocent people and trample the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Check. Further delegitimizing the causes and issues of not only the protesters but the anarchists too? Check. Giving the government carte blanche to further implement police state type laws and systems such as CCTV cameras everywhere? Check. Helping scare those who aren't yet aware of all the corruption and abuse of power so that they cling ever tighter to both their oppressors and the propaganda put out by the MSM (the "REAL aggressors")? Check. At causing a few thousand dollars worth of damage to well insured international corporations who make billions in profits each year? Check. Wait a sec, now they are starting to sound even more like agents provocateurs... Nah, put that thought out of your mind, it must just be a strange coincidence, nay crazy lefty conspiracy theory, that the Black Bloc's actions seem to coincide near perfectly with the goals of the pro-G20 crowd...


If you think you can simply oust Anarchists from all protests and the cops will leave you alone and the media will give you a fair shake then you're the one living in a fantasy world.


Wait, we're all of a sudden agreeing again? (note to others, AGAIN I never claimed what he is suggesting that I did).

EDIT to add: And, if you think smashing a couple cop cars and threatening other protesters will cause the cops and corporations and globallists to give-up and hand the country over to us thus ushering in some sort of anarchist utopia "then you're the one living in a fantasy world."


So I ask you- first present solid evidence of YOUR claims.


Taking into account the fact that my claims are not the claims that you wish to attribute to me, I'm pretty sure that if you actually read my posts above you'd find said evidence.

Frankly Nohierarchy, I'm both a little confused and a bit disappointed in you. After responding to you first post above, I checked out your profile and some of your posts in other threads. I not only contributed a number of stars and 2 or 3 flags to your threads/posts but I agreed with a lot of what you had to say. You argued your points rationally and were able to poke holes in others' illogical claims. Where on earth did these last couple posts come from?

EDIT: fixed all italics


[edit on 16-7-2010 by dangerouslogic]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by EspyderMan

You need to see a psychologist for your anger issues i believe.


i don't think so. i think anger is more than justified when jackbooted nazis are taking over your country.
psychologists are idiots, anyway. the whole "science" is based on imagination and opinion.



posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 01:50 AM
link   
To NoHierarchy and anyone else interested, I just started a new thread to discuss the legitimacy of "Black Bloc" tactics as a form of resistance. I think this is an important philosophical issue to resolve and I don't want to derail this whole thread going off on a tangent (nor would the mods appreciate that methinks
).

You can find the thread here (assuming it does not get moved as it very well might as I'm not sure at the moment whether I posted it in the proper forum):

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hope to see all you folks there (though please only contribute constructively if you do, no "Black Blockz is evilz" or "Die Pigz" comments please
).



posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by EspyderMan

You need to see a psychologist for your anger issues i believe.


i don't think so. i think anger is more than justified when jackbooted nazis are taking over your country.
psychologists are idiots, anyway. the whole "science" is based on imagination and opinion.


That is right it is your opinion. It is a science and I like psychology msyelf. People don't like the truth and they find ways to say it is normal.

But I personally believe after reading all these first few pages I have to say definitely misinfo.


Sh~~ happens.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by dangerouslogic

Originally posted by NoHierarchy
Who are these "hundreds" of witnesses that can state that police provocateurs were directly involved in either committing the acts or letting them happen?


Ok, slow down there buddy. First of all, did you even read anything I've written? When have I EVER claimed that there were actually agents provocateurs at the Toronto G20 protest? Unless I've suddenly stumbled into some alternate universe (which may very well be the case here on ATS
)I'm pretty sure the ENTIRE POINT OF THIS THREAD AND MY POSTS has been that, as of yet, THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE PROOF OF PROVOCATEURS!

And, again, had you read what I wrote, you would have understood that the hundreds of witnesses was loosely referring to all the people who saw first-hand the different events at the protest... ANARCHISTS INCLUDED!


As for the host of this series, he's actually got quite a number of episodes out and is fairly well known amongst Anarchist circles/viewers.


I don't doubt that either. My tongue-in-cheek comments regarding his "authenticity" were more a reaction to how sheerly ridiculous both your claim that the video actually debunked the provocateur theory as well as his complete lack of evidence or even a convincing argument for the same conclusion was. I'm sure for people that already agree with his politics, beliefs and version of what happened he's a hilarious and great show host. But for those of us who, let's say, aren't already Black Bloc adherents, he provides no reason nor documentary proof for anyone else to believe his claims.


If you'd rather listen to the mainstream media and the conspiracy theories of protesters who WEREN'T EVEN ON THE SCENE over the views of Anarchists who were actually there


Well, I'm pretty sure I've already suggested my views towards the MSM coverage, so I'll just chock this up to you (yet again) not actually reading my posts. But this second part makes a really good point! Come to think of it, in all the videos, photos, eye-witness accounts, etc, etc. that have come out from the protest there doesn't seem to actually be any protesters at the protest! Every video only shows heroic Black Bloc freedom fighters chasing down crying riot cops. I can't believe I never noticed before that there weren't any protesters "ON THE SCENE". (note to anyone else who is skimming my posts without actually reading them, I'M BEING SARCASTIC).

Continued next post...


I didn't read your other posts, so please excuse any ignorance of them on my part. I was only responding to your reply to mine. From the jist/tone of what you were saying, I took it you meant that there WERE provocateurs and that there were hundreds of non-black-bloc protesters present to back up the claim. Now, I'm open to it... I wouldn't be surprised even, but I also don't want disinformation being spread about the actions of the black bloc because A) The ultimate truth is important, B) We cannot wrongly single out the black bloc as provocateurs, and C) If provocateurs were NOT involved then we must be open to accepting the methods of the black bloc even if they are aggressive. It's counter-productive and serves the desires of the establishment to lambaste the black bloc and then further entangle/distance the issue with a conspiracy theory. Know what I'm sayin?

Well, technically I didn't claim the video debunked the notion of provocateurs, I merely copy/pasted the video title/description, but I'll give you that because I did post it essentially as a web-series counter-punch to the provocateur theory. What takes me off-guard from your comments is your total discrediting of the video as having "complete lack of evidence/argument". I don't see how you can hold such a view, ESPECIALLY when you concede that evidence for provocateurs is weak or non-existent. Right there adds weight to his argument in similarity to yours and bumps it up from "complete (or 100%) lack". I suppose I'm playing semantics but you seem very absolute in your assertions and although I'm uncertain from his video, it is still far more convincing than you make it out to be. At 2:25 in the video, you can see a newscast reporting that the police lost control of downtown for a couple hours on the first day of the protests. Two of their communication centers broke down in communication to each other which allowed a window of opportunity for black bloc protesters. This is actually well known/reported, the breakdown of police communication. Now the speculation isn't on that but instead whether it was intentional on the part of police and/or involved agent provocateurs. I know that the Stimulator lives in Canada and is involved in activism, I trust that he has inside information from Anarchist protesters on the black bloc actions during the G20.

Here is some reporting on the details of the G20 protests as well as the black bloc actions

...And here too

^^^Straight from the horses' mouths!

[edit on 18-7-2010 by NoHierarchy]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by dangerouslogic

originally posted by Nohierarchy
WHEN COPS BEAT THE SH** OUT OF PEACEFUL PROTESTERS, IT'S NOT THE FAULT OF ANARCHISTS.


Never said it was. In fact, I'd go even further and suggest that cops beating the crap out of protesters is... *drumroll* THE FAULT OF THE COPS AND THEIR HANDLERS.


WHEN THE MEDIA FAILS TO COVER A PROTEST PROPERLY/ACCURATELY, IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE ANARCHISTS.


Again, never said it was. Replace the word "cops" with "media" in my second sentence above.


THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THE WRONGDOING OF POLICE/MEDIA.


Yet once again, I never said there was. In fact I agree with you wholeheartedly.


And don't you dare scapegoat Anarchists who actually have the balls to fight back against a REAL aggressor.


Aww and we were just starting to agree!
So you are saying that the "REAL aggressor" was a couple of store windows, cop cars and journalists' camera lenses? Come on. If those "Anarchists" truly had "balls" and were targetting the "REAL aggressor" then they would have been engaging the cops who were attacking and arresting protesters, or perhaps even go after the people who this whole thing was actually about: the G20 attendees. Seriously, come on.


Black bloc tactics have been proven effective time and time again.


I SAID COME ON! They've "been proven effective time and time again" at accomplishing what, exactly? Giving the police an excuse in the public's mind to beat up and arrest innocent people and trample the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Check. Further delegitimizing the causes and issues of not only the protesters but the anarchists too? Check. Giving the government carte blanche to further implement police state type laws and systems such as CCTV cameras everywhere? Check. Helping scare those who aren't yet aware of all the corruption and abuse of power so that they cling ever tighter to both their oppressors and the propaganda put out by the MSM (the "REAL aggressors")? Check. At causing a few thousand dollars worth of damage to well insured international corporations who make billions in profits each year? Check. Wait a sec, now they are starting to sound even more like agents provocateurs... Nah, put that thought out of your mind, it must just be a strange coincidence, nay crazy lefty conspiracy theory, that the Black Bloc's actions seem to coincide near perfectly with the goals of the pro-G20 crowd...


If you think you can simply oust Anarchists from all protests and the cops will leave you alone and the media will give you a fair shake then you're the one living in a fantasy world.


Wait, we're all of a sudden agreeing again? (note to others, AGAIN I never claimed what he is suggesting that I did).

EDIT to add: And, if you think smashing a couple cop cars and threatening other protesters will cause the cops and corporations and globallists to give-up and hand the country over to us thus ushering in some sort of anarchist utopia "then you're the one living in a fantasy world."


So I ask you- first present solid evidence of YOUR claims.


Taking into account the fact that my claims are not the claims that you wish to attribute to me, I'm pretty sure that if you actually read my posts above you'd find said evidence.

Frankly Nohierarchy, I'm both a little confused and a bit disappointed in you. After responding to you first post above, I checked out your profile and some of your posts in other threads. I not only contributed a number of stars and 2 or 3 flags to your threads/posts but I agreed with a lot of what you had to say. You argued your points rationally and were able to poke holes in others' illogical claims. Where on earth did these last couple posts come from?

EDIT: fixed all italics


[edit on 16-7-2010 by dangerouslogic]


I'm glad we agree on so much!!!


One of the main tactics of the black bloc IS engaging police directly and especially using a technique called "Unarresting" to essentially unarrest other protesters caught in a brutal police net. The black bloc consistently engages with police as well as a variety of other appropriate targets- corporate chains, banks, and in the case of the G20 the Police Museum


Now you seem to be contradicting yourself when you agree that police/media misconduct is the fault of the media... yet you essentially BLAME their police state measures on the violence of Anarchists/Black bloc (which is not nearly as outrageous as to warrant such security measures or scapegoating). You need to stop thinking that Anarchists GIVE police an excuse to do anything wrong. When people engage in black bloc tactics, they know FULL WELL that they're putting themselves at risk of arrest and police brutality/less-than-lethal weapons, HOWEVER, there is NO excuse or blame to be put on Anarchists for the abusive treatment of OTHER protesters, nor of piss-poor media coverage that takes over other protesters' messages. If other protesters want their messages heard they need to shake the MEDIA by the collar and NOT Anarchists. Black bloc tactics don't give government carte blanche for a police state... this is not a day and age where we can pretend that these cops are just innocent jolly men doing their duty, or that corporate/banking chains are upstanding and socially beneficial businesses all part of this grand/churning wondrous system of Capitalism and the Anarchists are just these shadowy, dastardly, violent young punks who are up to no good, rebels without a cause, and mindlessly lashing out at anything they see. There is rhyme, reason, and reality to the violence, just as there is to such protest violence in any country. This is not a looting fest, this is not a sports riot, this is direct action against the establishment, it's a fundamentally different animal, and is fundamentally nobler if practiced properly and with the correct restraint/tact/principles/targets/necessity. In a nutshell, the targets of the black bloc essentially have it comin to them for good reasons. I'm not saying it's in every case, but in most cases it can be justified or at least the outrage minimized greatly towards black bloc actions when taken into context. And especially in principle, such direct action/self-defense can absolutely be justified both by itself and historically. It's a far cry from violent revolution. A police state is unreasonable.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by dangerouslogic
 


I never stated or implied that burning a couple cop cars would usher in an Anarchist utopia, but protests/actions like this take time to build up and every effort has its part in resisting tyrannical entities (including the police). It's a power struggle to be sure, and a victory to be celebrated. They're telling the police that they're not cowards, they're not afraid, and they do bite back. They're calling any bluffs of the police and punishing them for their own injustices for once. Anybody who can't cheer on a burning cop car at a protest seriously baffles me... some small part of you HAS to be secretly laughing/celebrating such events? I can see how you'd view it as senseless, and perhaps part of it is, but at the same time it's not something to be taken so seriously, it's principled mischief and if anybody walks that oxymoronic line beautifully it's Anarchists. Call it art, call it riot porn, call it criminal, but don't call it pointless. At the very least, it's a morale booster.

As for Anarchists attacking other protesters, when did this happen?

I'm honestly glad to hear you appreciated my other threads/posts and I apologize if I've been brash with you here in my initial response. However, this issue angers me and I face a constant wall and few allies. I feel I must correct misunderstandings about the whole thing and stop the mis/disinformation. I don't, however, believe that my first couple posts were mostly illogical. Take the video post for what you will, but writing it off completely is what ticked me off. I apologize if I made any rash assumptions about your views/implications, just know that I also put my rants out for others to hear out, so if they do not apply to you, perhaps subconsciously they were not meant to, hah...



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself when you agree that police/media misconduct is the fault of the media... yet you essentially BLAME their police state measures on the violence of Anarchists/Black bloc (which is not nearly as outrageous as to warrant such security measures or scapegoating). You need to stop thinking that Anarchists GIVE police an excuse to do anything wrong.


First of all, let me clear this up. I never personally blamed (nor would I) "Black Bloc" folks of ACTUALLY giving the police/government legitimate excuses for their behaviour. What I meant was (and I realize was perhaps not 100% clear) that in the public's eye (which of course is also skewed and manipulated by the piss poor reporting and/or deliberate disinformation put out by the MSM) these policies, budgets, tactics, etc are legitimized. My point is that regardless of differences of personal political/philosophical beliefs between groups of protesters, ultimately we have the same broad goals: that of bringing light to, and ultimately stopping the multitudes of governmental and corporate corruption and abuse. If our tactics, whether "Black Bloc" or any other prove to actually detract from or harm those goals, then that begs the question as to why those tactics would continue to be employed.

On the issue of morale boosting, etc. Of course, on an emotional level, it feels good to see symbols of corrupt corporations and institutions being smashed, etc. But that is not a good enough reason. Even ignoring my points from before about how its benefit to us is questionable at best whereas its benefit to those who seek to control us is tangible and significant, it also provides incentive for the cops, etc to treat everyone even worse than they may already have been ordered to do. As much as a burning cop car might make me smile for a moment, in the eyes of a riot cop seeing all types of protesters laughing and cheering around it you've simply justified in his/her mind the brutality and repression they've been ordered to carry out. Furthermore, you've also unwittingly provided a perfect photo-op for the lapdog media to "prove" to those who weren't at the protest that all the abuse and money and so on was actually justified (again though, I certainly do not blame the "Black Bloc" for the spin and outright propaganda produced by the media, only for making their jobs easier).

On the point of "unarresting" I would certainly agree that there is some legitimacy and even honour in such actions, but, at least at the Toronto G20 protest, I have seen no evidence of such actions taking place.

On the point of "Black Bloc" threatening other protesters, I never said they actually attacked them, but I have seen numerous examples of unmasked protesters confronting or even trying to debate "Black Bloc" types and being threatened with violence in return. As a parallel, at least as far as we know, no police actually raped any arrested protesters at the Toronto G20, however they did threaten it which is also a crime and, more importantly, is still an assault on the individual. It intimidates the victim, suppresses self-agency and resistance to oppression (as there are now new, even worse consequences to exercising one's basic rights) and can lead to mental illness, among other negative effects.

Overall though, I feel that 90% of our apparent disagreement can be chalked up to miscommunication. And perhaps this is a microcosm of the divide between anarchists and other "liberal and lefty" protesters. A divide which we desperately need to overcome if we hope to actually achieve any of our goals.

For further discussion on the "Black Bloc" tactics in general I will suggest again that we move that to my other thread. I've also been considering challenging you to a formal debate in the debate forums on this topic so please let me know if you'd be interested in that!

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by dangerouslogic
 


You raise many good points. And yes it does seem there is a problem of miscommunication that must be corrected.

I'll cya in your thread to discuss the black bloc further.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
A most interesting discussion.

Has anyone come across any info to corroborate the claims about the cars being planted?

I think there is a lot of dis and mis info going on concerning this issue, and i find it interesting to note the same straw-men tactics being used int his thread that I have come across on other forums where this topic is being discussed;

that is, arguing against egregious claims about 'evidence' when all anyone has really offered is pieces of the story.

I think the idea that these were 'police' infiltrators may be misguided. It's not the police who benefit from this as much as it is the defense contractors who get these billion-dollar security contracts to arm and outfit the police.

I suspect that whoever those guys are, they would certainly benefit from employing some of these so-called 'international anarchist protesters' to run amok and create a justification for such high security budgets.

It also seems relevant to note that a very similar script seemed to be followed in Vancouver during the 2010 games, where 'black-bloc' tactics were used to attack large, corporate stores (who would have the minimal damages 100% covered by insurance) while walls of well-armed police in riot gear stood by passively watching.

To claim these are are 'police infiltrators' is to think far too small. These guys are most likely from much higher up int he food chain.

i look forward to more details from this story to filter out eventually, like the serial numbers from those cruisers, more video from some of the ACTUAL protesters showing 'black bloc' dressed protesters running behind police lines, etc.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
I also found this recent bit of news interesting:




A Windsor man is charged with torching a Toronto Police cruiser during the G20 summit, police said Wednesday. Police also announced that a man previously arrested in the investigation was rearrested for allegedly breaching bail conditions....

The cruiser had been wrecked and was unoccupied when it was set on fire.

Giroux described the suspect as known to police and “I really don’t know what he was doing here, whether he has a legitimate purpose for being in the city.”

He said the suspect doesn’t appear to be the usual type of protester — a political dissenter — and is known for criminality by police but didn’t elaborate.

Nicodemo Catenacci, 41, is charged with arson and breach of probation.


So, they arrested some guy who is known to police for 'criminality' but he isnt known for political activism.

If thats true, it makes one wonder what this guy was doign at the right spot at the right time...

www.torontosun.com...






top topics



 
47
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join