OTTAWA – Protesters are accusing police of using undercover agents to provoke violent confrontations at the North American leaders' summit in Montebello, Que.
Such accusations have been made before after similar demonstrations but this time the alleged "agents provocateurs" have been caught on camera.
A video, posted on YouTube, shows three young men, their faces masked by bandannas, mingling Monday with protesters in front of a line of police in riot gear. At least one of the masked men is holding a rock in his hand.
The three are confronted by protest organizer Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. Coles makes it clear the masked men are not welcome among his group of protesters, whom he describes as mainly grandparents. He urges them to leave and find their own protest location.
Coles also demands that they put down their rocks. Other protesters begin to chime in that the three are really police agents. Several try to snatch the bandanas from their faces.
Rather than leave, the three actually start edging closer to the police line, where they appear to engage in discussions. They eventually push their way past an officer, whereupon other police shove them to the ground and handcuff them.
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
This is why I hate hippies.
They have no proof other than the cops and the guys being arrested wearing the same boots.
If the cops really wanted to just "Use their toys" I'm sure they could come up with a better way than that, and if these guys were supposed to start a riot so the cops could bust some heads, they sure missed a great opportunity, as they could have just started a scuffle with the other protesters and then the cops come rolling in to bust head and disperse the violent crowd.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Plausible, but not proven. I wouldn't doubt police or government trying to incite the start of riots. However, until I see conclusive evidence, I can't say this is the case. But it wouldn't suprise me one bit. What concerns me more at the moment is that we now have free speech zones miles away from where the actual meetings are being held and we also have the demonization of protesters by the media and government as lunitics and those with fringe political associations. Voicing concerns is the right of every citizen and it's sad when it has to happen behind clouds of tear gas and riot police. Our soverignty as a nation and rights as a citizen are dwindling and people have a right to stand up to say this isn't appropriate. I suppose it's not like the government cares though. Don't think we will ever have a government that acts as a representative of the people.
This is why I hate hippies.
They have no proof other than the cops and the guys being arrested wearing the same boots.
If the cops really wanted to just "Use their toys" I'm sure they could come up with a better way than that, and if these guys were supposed to start a riot so the cops could bust some heads, they sure missed a great opportunity, as they could have just started a scuffle with the other protesters and then the cops come rolling in to bust head and disperse the violent crowd.
Hippies? You should watch the video. It makes a pretty obvious case and you don't even see the shoes.
Check it out and tell me it doesn't seem suspicious.
This is why I hate hippies.
They have no proof other than the cops and the guys being arrested wearing the same boots.
If the cops really wanted to just "Use their toys" I'm sure they could come up with a better way than that, and if these guys were supposed to start a riot so the cops could bust some heads, they sure missed a great opportunity, as they could have just started a scuffle with the other protesters and then the cops come rolling in to bust head and disperse the violent crowd.
Larf. Nice analysis. So you're saying a 'better' way for the cops to have done this would be for plain clothes officers to start assaulting innocent protestors? Cops can engage other cops in a not-so-elaborate ruse like this, but if they even lay a finger on a person respecting the law heads would roll.
They're provocateurs alright . . . . . what's interesting is that he would automatically point at the cops when its far more likely they're among the radical cadre of anti-globalization people who gravitate to these events and try to initiate violent action for publicity. One example being the sputtering effort here in Calgary a few years ago during the G-8 summit.
They're his friends. Just not friends he wants on his side.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
If they weren't cops how did they get so close to the police line and have a whisper to the riot police with rocks in their hands without being arrested? How would they be able to break through the line if they were such obvious violent anti-globalization provocateurs?
This is my thought. My question is, if they are police agents, why automatically make the assumption that they are there to start something? Could be there to finger actual trouble makers if things got ugly. Starting a fight just so the riot squad can use it's newest toy seems like paranoia talking.
On a side note, if I had that guy screaming at me an a mob trying to rip my clothing off, I might ask the cops to arrest me too.
This is my thought. My question is, if they are police agents, why automatically make the assumption that they are there to start something?
The obvious assumption is that by causing trouble, they discredit the activist cause/protest at hand by forcing the general public to look at protestors as violent anarchists rather than concerned citizens. I don't see it as paranoid, I see it as extremely intelligent and effective of the police (if they are indeed undercover police). Makes perfect sense to me, I must be paranoid...
Quote:
On a side note, if I had that guy screaming at me an a mob trying to rip my clothing off, I might ask the cops to arrest me too.
A bandana covering one's face isn't exactly 'clothing'... its more like a mask. They wanted to identify the guys who's tactics they obviously didn't agree with.
This is my thought. My question is, if they are police agents, why automatically make the assumption that they are there to start something? Could be there to finger actual trouble makers if things got ugly. Starting a fight just so the riot squad can use it's newest toy seems like paranoia talking.
On a side note, if I had that guy screaming at me an a mob trying to rip my clothing off, I might ask the cops to arrest me too.
If you think them wanting to use their 'newest toys' has anything to do with this, you ought to really evaluate what you think the role of the Police is. I'll give you a hint, it's not really about crime fighting.
Last edited by Flash Walken; 08-22-2007 at 03:33 PM.
I don't think the purpose of inciting riots would be to try out a new toy. My guess is it would be benificial to police and government for these reasons:
1) demonize protesters - media will play the tapes of huge riots and tear gas and such and all protesters will be painted with a broad brush that they are all trouble makers. the media doesn't really like to play tapes of peaceful protests. kind of boring.
2) this in turn allows governments and police the ability to say "ok, you can't protest here. this is no longer a protest zone, we'll move all the protesters out to this area where we can handle them better because they are violent"
3) general public will accept this reasoning after seeing violent riots
4) police budgets can be increased to handle these situations, governments can introduce new laws with more control over the public.
5) government could even suspend all protests and declare martial law over a city during a summit such as this one if they deem protests to be too dangerous. i wouldn't count this out from happening in the future. Have a couple cops die on the line and there you go.
But this is an extremly conspiratorial viewpoint and just a guess at why they would want to incite riots if they indeeed do at all. And i'm not at all saying this is what I believe is happening. Nothing has been proven. Show me a memo or other government/police document that says they are to incite riots to cause destabilizion to further an agenda.
I don't think the purpose of inciting riots would be to try out a new toy. My guess is it would be benificial to police and government for these reasons:
1) demonize protesters - media will play the tapes of huge riots and tear gas and such and all protesters will be painted with a broad brush that they are all trouble makers. the media doesn't really like to play tapes of peaceful protests. kind of boring.
2) this in turn allows governments and police the ability to say "ok, you can't protest here. this is no longer a protest zone, we'll move all the protesters out to this area where we can handle them better because they are violent"
3) general public will accept this reasoning after seeing violent riots
4) police budgets can be increased to handle these situations, governments can introduce new laws with more control over the public.
5) government could even suspend all protests and declare martial law over a city during a summit such as this one if they deem protests to be too dangerous. i wouldn't count this out from happening in the future. Have a couple cops die on the line and there you go.
But this is an extremly conspiratorial viewpoint and just a guess at why they would want to incite riots if they indeeed do at all. And i'm not at all saying this is what I believe is happening. Nothing has been proven. Show me a memo or other government/police document that says they are to incite riots to cause destabilizion to further an agenda.
The original police statement was that 2 men and 2 women were arrested at the protests. Then, when confronted the video added, "those three men have also been arrested."
Anarchists don't wear the same kind of boots the riot squad wears, and if you hate cops, why exactly would you go to them for protection at a peaceful protest?
This is so outrageous it's funny. What kind of country do we live in?
I agree with you to an extent. But there is still a burden of proof that needs to be presented.
don't see how the boot argument is relevant at all. why can't anarchists wear police boots? their readily avaliable to the public. all you have to do is go down to seals action gear off blackfoot trail or order a pair off the net.
it seems they do talk to the police, which is suspicious, i agree.
my opinions on the kind of country we live in would be kind of controvertial here i think and would probably get off topic...and I know it was a rethorical question so...lol
I agree with you to an extent. But there is still a burden of proof that needs to be presented.
don't see how the boot argument is relevant at all. why can't anarchists wear police boots? their readily avaliable to the public. all you have to do is go down to seals action gear off blackfoot trail or order a pair off the net.
it seems they do talk to the police, which is suspicious, i agree.
my opinions on the kind of country we live in would be kind of controvertial here i think and would probably get off topic...and I know it was a rethorical question so...lol
The boots is a superficial argument, behind a long line of real, substantial arguments. But if you've ever actually been to a protest and seen anarchists, you'll know they don't wear police issue boots. Ever. One doesn't like to paint an entire group with one brush, but police issue gear is something you generally do not associate with anarchists. Shaved heads/mowhawks, tattoos and doc martins, certainly, but not faux-hawks and the exact same type of boots the riot squad was wearing.
You don't always get the cordial response when you try and break through a police line with a weapon, either.
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
If you think them wanting to use their 'newest toys' has anything to do with this, you ought to really evaluate what you think the role of the Police is. I'll give you a hint, it's not really about crime fighting.
Okay, I'll bite, what exactly do you think the REAL role of the police is?
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakan
Larf. Nice analysis. So you're saying a 'better' way for the cops to have done this would be for plain clothes officers to start assaulting innocent protestors? Cops can engage other cops in a not-so-elaborate ruse like this, but if they even lay a finger on a person respecting the law heads would roll.
Did you even watch this video?
I haven't seen the video (blocked at work) so maybe i'm way off, but I didn't mean to imply that the cops should start beating people up. What I am saying is that if the cops were there to incite violence why would they pass up what from the description is a perfect way for them to do it.
Guy gets harassed by other protesters telling him they don't want him there.
Guy throws rock at cops enraging protesters.
Protesters try to take down "Cop/Proterster"
Other cops move in to bash heads under the reasoning that someone threw a rock and the crowd became violent and needed to be dispursed.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
They're provocateurs alright . . . . . what's interesting is that he would automatically point at the cops when its far more likely they're among the radical cadre of anti-globalization people who gravitate to these events and try to initiate violent action for publicity.
They sure weren't acting like it. Radicals act radically - they actually do something to get arrested for and then try to avoid arrest. They don't listen to an old man wearing a blue blazer, they don't have long intimate chats with the riot squad, they don't intentionally get arrested, they don't wear the same boots the riot squad wears and when they get arrested, the riot squad doesn't keep it a secret.
I haven't seen the video (blocked at work) so maybe i'm way off, but I didn't mean to imply that the cops should start beating people up. What I am saying is that if the cops were there to incite violence why would they pass up what from the description is a perfect way for them to do it.
Guy gets harassed by other protesters telling him they don't want him there.
Guy throws rock at cops enraging protesters.
Protesters try to take down "Cop/Proterster"
Other cops move in to bash heads under the reasoning that someone threw a rock and the crowd became violent and needed to be dispursed.
Too dumb? They were found out and didn't know what to do next. You can tell.
It was a rather poorly planned ruse. The people there were a bunch of grandparents -- old people. These three guys couldn't have been more conspicuous and couldn't have picked a more unlikely group to stir up trouble with.
I don't buy the whole they're cops theory, I agree with Cowperson's assesment that they're members of professional protest groups that have sprung up at various protests around the world.
I don't have much trust in the protestors because way to often these things explode into violence when some idiot picks up a rock or a stick and charges the police.
We've seen multiple prostests this year where the police haven't had to intervene, and I doubt that the police of the government want to incite a riot where citizen's get tear gassed or shot or water hosed when the world is watching, its hardly the desired result that the Canadian government would want in the face of the over active scrutiny of the media.
But its far better to believe the head protestor I guess.
Hey look, its Elvis, gotta go.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Stop SPP Protest - Union Leader stops provocateurs
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
