Pixiq

Pigs are pigs no matter their nationality.

Move along, nothing to see here…
Mike Gogulski recently posted..Our modern world

Prediction: the “hordes” comment is going to incite the PC Trolls.

And the Black Bloc is a known false flag spec-ops. If you ever get a chance to witness them in action be sure to tail them and see who they eventually meet-up with. A great chance at photojournalism gold.

Carlos, you got to get pictures of the cops in New Orleans chasing everyone away from the oil spill. They say BP might have cracked the ocean floor:

http://americaspeaksink.com/2010/06/bp-oil-catastrophe-extinction-level-...

Where is the rain of molotov cocktails like in Greece?

Carlos, contrary to what you posted, most of the people arrested had nothing to do with the rioting and vandalism. In fact, the police gave the Black Bloc almost free reign, and when they were criticized for being too soft, arrested a bunch of people involved in a peaceful sit-in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/world/americas/28security.html

The Black Bloc got free reign because such violence is fomented by undercover cops, agent provocateurs.

The purpose is to enact a bit of theatre for the Mainspin Media 10 minute hate against peaceful protest groups.

Here’s proof: piggy boys in black robe with rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow

No, we have no reason to be afraid. They are here to protect us.
mepsipax recently posted..Is that my superpower

These strategies, while the will work inertly, are counter productive, for they will drive off the peaceful and open opportunity’s for the violent thugs. The thugs will come to fight, not protest. They will be organized, trained and out number you. This is when the fire bombs and nut crackers will fly and wives become widows. Look at the LA riots some time and ,if the reports from Toronto are true, it may be starting.

These strategies are counter productive, they will work for a time, but will ultimately drive off the peaceful and leave openings for violent thugs to take over. The thugs will come to fight, not protest. They will be trained, organized and out number you. The fire bombs and nut crackers will fly, wives will become widows and cities will burn. Look at the LA riots.

The ‘Miami Model’ (like a handful of protests before it) is designed to intimidate citizens through false and aggressive arrests. The plan is to keep the population at large afraid of joining civil protests.

Where street protests are an important part of this country’s history, today the government is afraid of mass Vietnam-style protests. They fear not having control over public opinion on matters of war and the economy.

So what better way to keep ordinary citizens away from political protests, than teach ‘em with a dose of fear – batons, pepper spray, tasers, sonic and heat weapons, plus the threat of a lifelong criminal record, even felony terrorism charges! All just for showing up in public to voice your opinion.

The only people left who are brave enough to protest are those with nothing to lose!

Insane. Please take your medications. PDs may have undercover officers in the crowds to be able to report on their movements but they are not the ones causing the destruction. Get real.

I think the police in the above video looked professional and restrained. They moved slowly and gave loud verbal commands before they put their hands on people. I saw no baton swings or any other use of force. Pardon them for trying to control rioters.

How would you experts advise the police to handle the destruction and mass vandalism coming from the protesters? A certain amount of force and intimidation is necessary to stop the violence. I see a lot of bitching here but no real suggestions.

Sorry about the double post. Some thing is going on with my computer, had to re-boot.

In order for an arrest to occur in America, police need probable cause that a crime is being committed. The arrest of journalists documenting the protests seems to be unconstitutional because it is unlikely that such journalists are breaking the law when doing their jobs, thus giving the police no probable cause to arrest them.

The arrest of such people without probable cause is, of course, an egregious abuse of the right to free speech protected by the Constitution, which is clearly developed law that would subject the offending officers to personal liability. They would not have qualified immunity in this case.

I’m not going to address the claim, documented by others on youtube, that the agitators demanding vandalism in Toronto are really undercover police officers. However, it would explain the curious development noted by Mark Steyn and others over the weekend that police let the rioters burn police cars and destroy other private property unmolested, only to attack innocent journalists when the demand for public order arose.

So they let rioters burn police cars? I suppose the 500+ arrests had nothing to do with them trying to stop further violence? Maybe those 500 were all Indymedia “journalists”?

You can’t have it both ways folks. Either the police stand by and let the city burn or they step in and enforce public order. Mass unrest demands a massive response in order to be effective.

Please notice Johnny Law ignoring the cops willful destruction of private property, and attempted theft.

Also, Johnny Law, they didnt actually arrest any of the arsonists. For some odd reason, the police let the black bloc guys run wild, but mass arrest peaceful protesters. All it takes is a search on youtube to watch the videos.

Most protesters aren’t engaging in “destruction and mass vandalism.” It’s a very small fraction of the crowds.

Yet cops sweep up whoever’s on the street, charge them all, forcing everyone present to account for the actions of a few.

That’s not justice, and it plays right into the plan to scare law-abiding citizens away from expressing themselves publicly.

“Mass unrest demands a massive response in order to be effective.”

Notwithstanding that the riots are in Canada, since you’re American I’ll frame my response as applicable to America.

You seem to be unfamiliar with the Constitution and the requirements of Constitutional law. Allow me to explain, yet again, that individuals are protected by due process rights. Among those rights is that police must have probable cause to arrest an individual. Therefore, a “massive response” must treat every person as particular, consistent with the requirements of due process and individual rights. A police officer cannot arrest someone without probable cause merely because some other group is engaged in lawbreaking.

There is no “both ways” about it. Police must respect the Constitutional due process rights of all persons they arrest or come in contact with. They do not have to “let the city burn” (although again, there seems to be some evidence that the agitators were in fact undercover police). They can arrest people engaged in violence becase it is evident that in those cases there is probable cause that a law is being broken. But police officers cannot arrest journalists who are not breaking any laws, because doing so would violate their Constitutional rights.

I also re-state, yet again, that a police officer that violates a Constitutional right that is “clearly established law” would have no qualified immunity and would not be protected by the state for his actions. Such an officer could be required to pay out of pocket PERSONALLY. That has happened frequently enough. I can point you to some cases in 2010 where the Federal Courts have discussed egregious cases of officer abuse where the police have not been protected by qualified immunity.

Gee thanks for that lesson on the Constitution. I am so surprised to learn that you can’t make a preemptive arrest of someone. Who would have thought?

So are you saying the police can’t take any action to prevent crimes such as these mass acts of vandalism from occurring? The police do have the right to regulate movement during times of civil unrest or during a state of emergency. If they are trying to clear an area for the purpose of maintaining order and people refuse to leave, they can arrest those folks.

That is exactly what happens during these G20 like events. The soap dodgers show that they are incapable of doing a peaceful protest and start tearing shit up so the police tighten the city down. While you may want to equate this to some police state, it is a simple matter of trying to control the violence until the conference is over. I can assure you that as a police officer, I don’t give a crap of these dreadlock fools bang on drums and dance to snappy chants. However if they start flinging rocks, the game changes. And it always seems to change.

So I ask again, what do you recommend the police do to prevent further violence in a way that doesn’t offend you? Or should they even bother?

I love how you are blaming the cops for letting the “black bloc” guys run around but when they actually try to prevent crime, you are all up in arms about that as well.

The police truly can’t win with you. If violence happens,you say the police must have let it happen. If violence doesn’t happen, it isn’t because the police acted decisively and prevented it. Instead, you say the protesters were obviously peaceful and the police were acting like thugs. The proof? The fact that violence didn’t happen of course!

That faulty circular logic makes my head hurt.

Well now, Johnny Law I can tell you. It is 1970 and I have 5 years as a deputy,when the students at a local university decide to have a protest. This has gone on for about two days and there is no problem, the cops and students are getting along and the trouble makers have been run off by both sides, it is more a large street party than any thing else. In fact the affair is to end at sun down and every body go home.

Well…. in comes the National Guard, the general in charge informs every body he is taking over and he will teach” these commies a lesion”.
The tactics he used were basically the Miami Model, all hell came to lunch. The next day, at 4 in the morning I and the other deputy’s, the ones that are left, are in a line blocking an intersection with the only light a burning store behind us. We were well equipped with foot ball helmets with clear plastic duck taped on for face shields, with ax handles and garbage can lids. Every fifth man had fire extinguisher loaded with tear gas. I am standing there, so tired I am shaking, watching the streaks from the fire bombs coming in, when the poem go Tell Spartans comes to mind.
The national guard and there general, had gone for reinforcements. We were pulled of for rest shortly after. We, and some of the city cops, combat vets all, had a meeting and vote. We started removing our patches and badges prepared to join the rioters. We wanted to know how the national guard general and his amateurs would do if faced with the real thing. Well the whole thing just suddenly stooped and every one went home, we never got the chance to kick NG ass.

This is one reasion why I think the Miami aproch is stuped.

I love watching these assholes getting arrested. Do you have anymore video? If I was rich I would buy everyone of those officers a steak dinner and take them to a Leafs game.

It’s good that you know that police cannot make preemptive arrests of people. Police are unbelievably ignorant of basic constitutional rights and there are plenty of cases this year in which Federal Courts have held officers personally liable for their egregious abuses. Perhaps if you were aware of how many of your cohorts in Blue are amazingly ignorant of these basic Constitutional rights, then you would realize your sarcasm is misplaced.

I have said, and I quote, “police can arrest people engaged in violence becase it is evident that in those cases there is probable cause that a law is being broken.” From that clear and unambiguous statement, you seem to twist it to mean me saying “So are you saying the police can’t take any action to prevent crimes such as these mass acts of vandalism from occurring?” No, that is not what I’m saying. If you’re being deliberately obtuse, then please refrain. If you’re stragely incapable of understanding my clear statement that police can arrest people breaking the law, then perhaps you need to seek help with reading comprehension. I don’t know how much more clear I can make it. Then again, perhaps your emotions are getting the best of you. Wouldn’t be the first time that happened to a police officer. Nevertheless, your inability to understand such a clear statement does not speak well of you.

Furthermore, it’s not up to you whether you like or dislike people who bang drums. Your personal preferences are irrelevant. What matters is whether people are breaking the law. Again, while it might be nice that you don’t mind people who bang drums, even if you objected to it fiercely you are obligated to let that activity continue so long as it’s not breaking any law. And in that vein, let me state again that I find it unlikely that journalists who were beaten and arrested by the police were breaking the law. It is unlikely that is the case, given past history with these incredibly inferior police tactics (in which few people are actually convicted of things). Arrest the people breaking the laws, refrain from arresting people who obey the laws. Is that really so hard?

Facts are stubborn things. It is clear that the police arrested several journalists who were not engaged in violence. It is also clear that the police did not take any action when the “black bloc” people began their violent vandalism.

People want to know why the cops refrained from arresting the vandals but instead arrested the photographers. Is is a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

So all 500 arrests were journalists?

So you and your buddies were going to strip off your patches and join the riots? Suddenly I realize why you didn’t do more than 12 years. People with that kind of poor judgement don’t usually make it in this profession. I personally think that story is bullshit but hey who know?

I did not insult you. do not insult me.

Okay so we agree that the police can and should arrest people who break the law in front of them. Now can you please answer my question. So I ask again, what do you recommend the police do to prevent further violence in a way that doesn’t offend you? Or should they even bother?

From what you are writing, it doesn’t seem like you have any decent suggestions on how the police should do crowd control. It sounds like you think they should just wait for cars to start burning and then take action. You do realize that it is not so simple to just walk into a riot in progress and arrest someone right?

I really think you have no idea what the police should do in these situations but the sight of police in riot gear bothers you so you feel the need to criticize them.

Let’s do an intellectual exercise here. You are the chief of police in a large city that is hosting a G20 type conference. You know from the experience of other cities that there will be a large number drum banging hippy protesters. You also know that there will be groups such as the black bloc who like to cause destruction. You have at your disposal a large police force with the same gear as seen in these videos. How would you deploy your forces to protect the city?

Do you have any idea?

When you start comparing something to Tell the Spartans, I have to laugh at the dramatic wording. I just find it hard to believe that you and your fellow officers decided to go join the protesters. That’s crazy and I think you either made it up or remember it wrong. I can believe that a couple of cops stood around and joked about fighting with the NG but to try to tell me it almost actually happened is silly and insults a person’s intelligence.

As to why I polled the pin, it was medical, old troubles from the Army and Vietnam, would you like to see my two purple hearts. As to the rest, this was 40 years ago, The NG then is not the NG now. This General was a real ass and if he had been in Vietnam some one would have probably have gut a grenade in his shorts. He was a politician with no time in the regular Army and no brains. This was only one bone headed stunt, he puled others . The next Governor in ran his ass off.
As to the story, were you there? I was.

If you want to confirm facts, I suggest you read a newspaper. Otherwise, do you own homework.

As for me, I have little doubt that many lawbreakers were arrested. I also have little doubt that the photographers that the police arrested were not breaking the law.

Well you keep implying that the police ignored all the lawbreakers and went after the journalists. I’m glad to see that you can acknowledge that the police did try to enforce the laws by going after the criminals. I’m sure a few photographers (especially the indymedia types) got caught up in the arrests but those aren’t real journalists and consider themselves part of the protesters. You can’t strap on a digital camera and stand in the middle of the rioters and not expect the police to treat you the same.

Carlos, this commenting system does not let me respond to a post once it is below several tiers. I’m trying to respond to Johnny Law’s post asking about what I would do to deal with the G20.

JL: “From what you are writing, it doesn’t seem like you have any decent suggestions on how the police should do crowd control. It sounds like you think they should just wait for cars to start burning and then take action. You do realize that it is not so simple to just walk into a riot in progress and arrest someone right?”

Crowd control, when done consistent with constitutional rights to peacably assemble, is perfectly fine. Don’t put words in my mouth.

JL: “the sight of police in riot gear bothers you so you feel the need to criticize them.”

Did I ever say riot gear bothered me? You are an emotional one, aren’t you? You love to make up facts about people you’re talking to, it appears. Regardless, in a free society people SHOULD criticize the police because it is legitimite and appropriate that people watch the watchers. If the police are engaged in legitimate execution of the laws, then criticism will be met with a fair and appropriate answer. Do you find it unsettling that people criticize the police? Do you think the police should be unaccountable and that they should not have to answer any criticism?

JL: “You have at your disposal a large police force with the same gear as seen in these videos. How would you deploy your forces to protect the city?”

At a minimum, I’d tell the officers that people not breaking the law should not be arrested. But as for the rest, your question is based on a falty premise. Cops do not get to break the law and violate constitutional rights because the latest theory in policing says they can. Whether deployed in masse with effective and legitimate crowd control, or deployed based on where the action is thought to be, is a tactical matter that has little to do with the fundamental premise that police cannot arrest without probable cause innocent people who are not breaking the law. The strongest police presence in the world can respect those rights or violate them, as can the weakest police presence. The size or nature of the police response is more a question of tactical effectivenss; ultimately, so long as the police themselves do not break the law by violating the Constitution, then the only question is whether the response was effective. From all accounts, these massive tactics are not that effective because few if any are convicted months after the arrests take place. In addition, the fact that the police did not stop the rioters initially and let the “black bloc” people burn and vandalize cars and businesses, also seems to suggest a failure of effectiveness in the tactic (does the tactic call for permitting the vandals to riot until there is a large enough police presence? It’s not clear).

It has been 40 years, perhaps some things may not be as clear as they were, I do not know. How ever the whole is clear. And, no , it was all of the SO and the majority of the city cops. This was no joke. You were not there and did not see how the NG troops were acting, we would have gone after the NG, no one else. And by the way, one of the guard troops bayoneted a cop, in full uniform. This was all covered up, and became a non event. The cop, who was not badly injured, was given a promotion and a nice payment. The General, who had never served in the regaler Army, was retired shortly after.

Authoritarian Submissive bullshitter sticks his head in the sand. Won’t even comment on the very *real* video. Typical of Johnny Bootlicker.

I suppose you never heard of Operation GLADIO, COINTELPRO, or “false flag” ops. Go ahead, deny it – but maybe you’re the one who needs medications if you can’t handle reality.

Are you referring to the *violence* perpetrated by the G20 tax-farmers (governments?) How do we stop government violence? Any real suggestions, or are you too authoritarian submissive?

As to the Spartan statement,I was taking classes at the local university and we had been studying the Greeks. It came to mind. I added it to show the state of mind and to add a little color. Now, the SO at that time had about 20 full time and apex. 75 reservists. Most were on duty and at that meeting. Along with a large number of the city PD. The vote was overwhelming in favor. We were pissed at the NG. We would have gone after the NG only.

The NG were behaving very badly, and had even bayoneted a cop, in full uniform. Luckily he was not too badly injured, the whole thing was covered up and became a non event, the cop was promoted and received a nice pay check. All under the table. The General was “retired” shortly after, and was replaced with a retired Regaler Army officer, west point I believe, who started an extensive traning program and made a number of changes. Now you were not there, I was.

It is clear from your exaggerations that you are interested in only antagonizing. How cop-like.

I suggest you refrain from further posting until you’re willing to have an honest conversation, which seems to be Sydney’s objective.

@ Johnny Law

Here is a simple, direct question to which I would really like to hear your answer:

During a protest consisting of 5,000 peaceful, law-abiding protestors and 20 violent, law-breakers, do you believe the proper police response is to start arresting large amounts of random people and “sort them out later?”

Not rocket science bud…arrest those who destroy shit. Leave those alone who are peacefully protesting. For a $1 billion dollar security cost I think we can expect our police to be aware of and act on the distinction. Yes, we should be able to have it both ways.

Again…if you haven’t noticed yet, the actual destruction of cop cars and private property was caused by a very small amount of people who are career shit-disturbers called the black bloc. Most of the other folks, the peaceful ones are to be lauded for their fortitude to stand up for what they believe in even if it means a beating and night in jail.

A few of us still give a shit about out charter rights.

“You can’t strap on a digital camera and stand in the middle of the rioters and not expect the police to treat you the same.”

Perhaps we have higher expectations than you. Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not distinguish between big media, indy media, and yes, even private citizens. Nor should it. Please educate yourself before mouthing off stupidity.

Notice section 2b under Fundamental Freedoms:
http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/charter/charter.text.html

Please do fuck off somewhere like North Korea. I think you would be much more comfortable there.

Gee more great ideas. Arrest the lawbreakers! Of course. It’s all so simple now.

You guys are cracking me up. It’s obvious you have no idea what the police should have done to try to prevent the rioting. You just don’t like what they did but have no suggestions on how to improve other than some vague comments. Classic.

@Darren

“Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not distinguish between big media, indy media, and yes, even private citizens. Nor should it.”

Okay but if you are standing in the middle of a group of protesters and the line of riot police are coming towards you after an order to disperse had been given, what the hell do you expect to happen? They are not going to take the time to examine your credentials. You are in the middle of an assembly that has been declared unlawful. Time to go, either home or to jail, camera or not.

I can answer, It is so they can be finger printed and ” checked out” then a file can be started and they will be listed and for ever in the system. The brass loves lists and files, if they had there way every one would a number tattooed and a file stated at birth. Got to keep the Eloy in line, don’t you know.

The answer to your question is nope. However I do think the police should set up perimeters to keep the protesters from disrupting the events. I also think that once large groups gather and they are observed blocking the streets and/or stockpiling rocks and/or making barricades, the police should order them to disperse. Then if those folks don’t disperse, they should go to jail for disobeying a lawful order.

See, is it that hard to answer a question with a little detail? Now you try. Give me some realistic options for the police that won’t hurt your delicate feelings.

Well, well. Look who’s crawled out from under their bridge to troll the site once again. I thought you got tired of the internet, Johnny?

Or did you just think people would forget about you if you stayed quiet long enough?
Michaelk42 recently posted..Pogan sentencing- delayed