It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


G20 officer: 'This ain't Canada right now'

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 08:09 PM

Originally posted by loagun
I am sorry but I don't give a sh*t what your protesting or if your chanting 'Freedom' while your destroying property that someone else has to pay for.

Please point out where in the video in the original post the protesters destroyed anything besides this police officer's credibility.

I'll be waiting for your response.

In the mean time, please look up the definition of 'protester' and 'rioter' and note the differences between the two.

Also, if you would be so kind, please explain to me how some rioters in a completely separate incident justify the cracking down of civil liberties of peaceful protesters?

Your reply to this post is greatly appreciated.
edit on 1/21/2011 by PETROLCOIN because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 08:16 PM
reply to post by InSanE1

You are from Toronto and you are siding with the destruction that was put forth onto our very peaceful city. You can walk in downtown Toronto at any hour of the morning or night alone and be safe. I have been in Toronto for almost 10 years (19-28) and I work as a bartender walking home at 3:30 am alone and have never been robbed, beaten, or vandalized in any way. The mess that Toronto suffered the week of the G20 was nothing even considerably close to or remotely related to anything the city EVER sees. It was obvious to anyone that police force was on high alert, and didn't know what to expect after all hell broke loose and police cars were bombed. Anyone then that decided to push the buttons of the police officers full well knowing the tension they were under while dealing with riots and vandalism that is completely foreign to Canada got exactly what they deserved.

If downtown Toronto had not been destroyed then I think all these 'boo-hoo for the protesters' threads, posts, comments, videos would be completely relevent, but they are not. The protesters DESTROYED downtown Toronto. This isn't a topic where you can simply report on one side. God, what are you, the US media?

posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 08:40 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

I can see both sides of this rgument. Hear me out before you light me on fire on the front lawn.

The G-20 is a summit that deals with world leaders, and as such, you will have tight security. In the video, which is in Canada, I can only offer opinions because I am not Canadian Law Enforcement. Here in the States, any type of function that deals with the President or Vice President, or where Federal Agencies are involved with foriegn dignataries (DSS) the site they are at becomes Federal for jurisdictional reasons (as we saw in Arizona).

A security cordon is set up, and anyone who wants to get close is required to go through that cordon. If you dont wish to be searched, then you have that right, but it means you won't be getting anymore closer than you are now. Even though sidewalks and public streets are public right of ways, those same areas can be shut down depending on whats going on.

We have had this type of conversation with 3rd parties recording with video (and as you see they were allowed to record that encounter in Canada) who either get to close, or somehow interfere with the situation.

There is no difference in shutting down an area for a G-20 summit and shutting down a road because of an injury accident, closing down a highway, both sides, for 6 hours because of a fatality accident, evacuating people form their houses because of a gas main break, bomb threat, escaped gunmen / criminal etc etc.

When you go to a public event, football game, soccer game etc at a major stadium, you as well as any bags, purses etc are subject to search as a condition to gain entrance to that venue. Again, you can refuse the search, but you wont be getting inside either.

Here in the states your right to protest is guranteed by the 1st amendment. Where you protest is not, so long as you are in a public area and not prohibiting the free travel by others, you are fine. The moment your actions interfere with others in a public right of way (road) then its problematic because even yhtough your rights allow you to protest, the constitution does not allow your right to protest override another person right to freedom of movement etc.

An event like this is an active call or function, for law enforcement participating in it. As such, they can take actions authorized under law for them to do their jobs. The other thing to keep in mind, and this covers some of the video I have seen with G-10 / 20 summits and use of force.

Its one thing to have a one on one encounter with a cop, it go downhill, and the person runs from the cop. You would most likely have a foot pursuit, etc.

At an event with high profile dignataries, a mass of people who are there to legitimately protest for whatever reason, you will have people who are there to cause problems. Those people we have issues with, but they are not our concern. At an event like this, a person or group of people who attempt to penetrate a security cordon, can be viewed as a deadly force encounter. They are refusing to abide by security cordons, lawful commands and are doing what they can to penetrate for whatever reason.

Even if they are attempting to make a benign statement, we have to assume its intended to potentially kill people. If theyhave bags with them, we would have to assume they are armed, have weapoins in the bag, or maybe a bomb. We dont get the ability since the people are refusing to comply, to talk and find out if they are a threat or not.

Those groups of people are the ones who screw it up for the rest of us who are their to legitimately protest. The moment you have a challenge at a security perimeter, the response is going to be regain control of that situation as quickly as possible. You will see the crowds be dispersed, and a push back to create room inbetween the perimeter on out to resecure.

My question for those who have issues with what they perceive as a loss of civil liberties, please explain if you dont mind who your liberties are taken away from you.

And I mean that question with all due respect. I am answering this from a Law Enforcement viewpoint, and am curious about your viewpoint and perceptions.

edit on 21-1-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 11:56 PM
The officer getting up in the guy's face was on such a power trip.

Intimidation is not a tool anyone is wise to use.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 12:55 AM
It's like when a USA aircraft carrier is in, let's say, the Persian Gulf. The aircraft carrier is actual American soil --a roving piece of American soil.

The G20 is the same thing. It's a roving piece of land that isn't bound by whatever laws of whatever country they're currently in, as long as the G20 is officially gathered you have no rights in the area they specify, which is a specified perimeter around the meeting (building). .

The problem is, each time the G20 gather, this "perimeter" gets bigger and bigger.

The thing to watch is when the "perimeter" finally is positioned just a little too perfectly over the capital of the NWO's choice for where they're going to set up shop. Some people believe it will be Canada, so I guess when you see the G20 meeting at a building in Ottawa, then look out, as Ottawa will technically no longer be the capital of Canada as long as the G20 is there within city limits. Interesting loophole, wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 01:53 AM
reply to post by loagun

Those police cars were left for hours unattended. Finally, several black dressed( later to be revealed undercover police) individuals began to damage the police cars. Nearby protesters even confronted undercover police asking them what they were accomplishing. Later, police dressed as protesters would break windows and spray paint walls. Finally, these same individuals were allowed through riot police lines to be whisked away in unmarked rental vans.
The police created the circumstances they needed to utilize force, and justify their budgets.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 02:43 AM
reply to post by stephinrazin

Proof please.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 03:05 AM
At least they're honest and tell the truth as it is. I hate it when they say words like freedom and liberty and at the same time practice full on facism.
What can be done to fix this? Nothing. Nothing will ever be changed. This is the brave new anti-terrorist world and it will never change.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:33 AM

Originally posted by loagun
As a Canadian and a self made Torontonian (moved there at 19) I don't believe the cops did anything wrong. I am going to get sh*t on for that statement I am sure... but seeing the mess that happened during the G20 and the outright disrespect and vandalism that the city of Toronto faced was just disgusting. If people are going to post video's like this then I wish they would also post video

The Black Bloc was RCMP. They incited the violence and the riots, given the police forces the right to mobilize against the protesters. I've seen too many videos and heard too many first/second-hand accounts of the Black Block being police provacateurs that it is without a doubt.

The media at the time claimed they just "flew in" from "around Canada" to riot in Toronto. Then the RCMP commissioner was on CTV claimed that the Black Block were literally "terrorists" and action needed to be taken against all protesters.

RCMP provacateurs ALWAYS wear police-issue boots. They might have learned since, but I've heard accounts of BB wearing police-issue boots being "arrested", thrown into a SWAT van, then coming out two minutes later in full riot gear.

And for the "this is not Canada" comment by the RCMP cop... Maybe you should look at a map alongside our constitution. If that wasn't Canada, then why the hell were you not fighting to reclaim it instead of picking on protesters?
edit on 22-1-2011 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi because: (no reason given)


"Protestor Adam Nobody, 27, was arrested in Queen's Park on 26 June. Amateur video uploaded to YouTube[93] showed at least a dozen officers surrounding and beating Nobody, who was not armed and did not appear to resist. He suffered a broken nose and cheekbone, and was charged with assaulting police. These charges were eventually dropped, and a Special Investigations Unit investigation was opened into the incident. This investigation was closed without any charges laid, because the SIU was unable to identify the officers. They had covered their identification badges, police witnesses all claimed to be unable to identify them, and the arresting officer had written an invalid ID number on Nobody's arrest record.

Police chief Bill Blair insisted that a "forensic examination" had proven the video was "tampered with," removing proof that Nobody was an armed, violent criminal, but soon retracted this statement admitting he had no evidence to support it. Blair's claims led to increased attention to the case, new witnesses coming forwards, and a second video corroborating the first. On 30 November the SIU re-opened its investigation, obtained the co-operation of a police officer who witnessed the incident, and laid charges against Const. Andalib-Goortani. The SIU has the names of other officers involved but has not yet laid charges against them.[94][95][96][97][98][99][100]

Blair and the Toronto Police have been harshly criticized over the incident, with many commentators calling for Blair to resign.[101][102][103]"

This image pretty much sums it up

edi t on 22-1-2011 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:17 AM
Actually civil rights exist at all times in all places.

Arbitrary methods of denying those civil rights are known as Tyranny.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:24 AM
The Ombudsman investigating police behavior during the G20 meetings made public three very disturbing discoveries...

1. Toronto/Ontario enacted in secret an obscure law from the 1930's that allowed for special powers to be granted to law enforcement to protect national infrastructure.

The law was never written to be used against protestors, it was designed to prevent agents from the axis powers from destroying vital installations.

2. Officers were advised to extend the exclusion zone substantially farther out then was authorized or reported.

3. The 'official' word to protesters was that if they obeyed the laws and followed the rules, there would be no problems.

The ombudsman found that this was impossible. The public was advised of one set of rules, the city/province enacted (again, in secret) a second set of rules and the police where given a free hand in enforcing a third set of rules.

At no point was the public given any chance to protest freely/peacefully; without any actual knowledge of what guidelines anyone was following or what was being enforced obeying the rules was impossible.

'Trap' was the word actually used to describe the situation.

The Ombudsman also stated that thier investigation was stone-walled at every turn by officials and the police.

CBC - G20 police rule slammed by ombudsman
edit on 22-1-2011 by [davinci] because: Spelling

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 07:13 AM
It is interesting to note that at the conclusion of the Nuremberg trials, it was clearly stated that if someone is ordered to commit a reprehensible act, it is their duty to not follow orders and to report the commanding officer.

As to the legality of these arrests, for the G20 summit, the Canadian government dusted off one of the most archaic laws in the books called "Breeching The Queen's Peace", which basically leaves it to the individual officer's discretion as to what that may mean.

It basically boils down to the ultimate police state where you can be arrested anywhere, anytime, for no reason other than the discretion of a particular officer.

the Billmeister

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 08:59 AM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

Forget the law, the law has become a tool of the wicked and useless for the people, There are no laws except natures laws. Things still have consequences though, don't ever forget that.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:16 AM
agent provocateurs , Im sorry but they are FACT , prove to us that these riotors were NOT agent provocateurs !!- what are their names , how long were they detained for ? I bet you dont know ! . Its easy for you to blurt out "proof please" . research agent provocateurs if they exsist which they do why would you so dismissively not even do a bit of connecting the dots ??? Dont be so lazy . look at youtube videos showing "riotors" wearing POLICE ISSUE BOOTS how do you explain that ?

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:22 AM
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Just because the protesters see a few people wrecking a police car it doesn't give anyone the right to join in and start wrecking storefronts.

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:34 AM
Since the cops were caught red handed at Montbello causing violence while disguised as protestors, and then they were busted lying about it and finally had to admit to it...
At no time now can it be assumed that protestors are doing anything.

The cops have been shown to be capable of going far beyond the criminal, and that they have the "power" to do it too..
Only thing stopping them is truth and justice...

Oh yeah, this irrational fear of camers law enforcement is starting to exibit in the western world....

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:43 AM
reply to post by Danbones

nailed it dan , when police act like that they correctly lose what few allies they may have had left . Why the F do the police agree to do that it surely goes against everything they signed up for ??

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 10:16 AM
This is why I urge people here to band together and start forming militias here in Canada. Check out Freeman on the land information and learn about survival skills and get a bunch of guys together and start becoming peace officers yourselves.

When the police stop becoming peace officers and turn into nazis its time to band together and form your own society!

Every single one of us can become a peace officer and have the same powers as these so called cops. Its all legal... PEOPLE NEED TO START TAKING ACTION INSTEAD OF BEING LAZY AND EXPECTING EVERYONE ELSE TO DO ALL THEIR WORK FOR THEM!

Start reading up on the criminal code of Canada and you will learn how to deal with these thugs called police.
edit on 1-22-2011 by CPYKOmega because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:02 AM
I usually don't respond to too many posts at this site, however, this post I am outraged at. If it means my children are safer, I would want everything searched, computer chips implanted (gps tracking), and everything visible (ie x ray vehicles circling around everywhere), I am all for it.......nuff said !

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:43 AM
reply to post by crovax619

How would what you said make your children safer, do you want them to grow up in a fascist state of constant searches, police on power trips and X ray vans, for gods sake, are you some kind of nazi or something?

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in