Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Police Granted 'Special Powers' to Guard 'Fortress Toronto'
New regulations give police right to search anyone near security fence Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/06/25/g20-new-powers.html#ixzz0rrtJwaRN
TORONTO - Police forces in charge of security for the G20 in Toronto have been granted special powers for the duration of the summit.
'Don't touch that fence!' The new legislation allows police to search anyone within five metres of the G20 security fence in downtown Toronto (Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press) The new powers took effect Monday and apply only along the border of
the G20 security fence that encircles a portion of the downtown core.
This so-called red zone includes the Metro Toronto Convention Centre,
where delegates will meet.
The new powers are designed specifically for the G20, CBC's Colin Butler reported Friday.
Ontario's cabinet quietly passed the new rules on June 2 without legislature debate.
Sgt. Tim Burrows of the G8/G20 Integrated Security Unit said the new regulations make parts of the existing Public Works Protection Act apply to the G20 security zone in downtown Toronto.
"The public has nothing to fear with this legislation and the way the police will use this legislation," said Burrows. "It really comes down to a case of common sense and officer discretion. If you're approaching that fence line, we want to know why."
The new powers are in effect on the streets and sidewalks in and around the security fence.
Under the new regulations, anyone who comes within five metres of the security area is obliged to give police their name and state the purpose of their visit.
Police, at their discretion, can deny access to the area and "use whatever force is necessary" to keep people out.
Anyone who refuses to identify themselves or refuses to provide a reason for their visit can be fined up to $500.
The new rules also give police the power to search anyone who approaches the fence.
The regulation also says that if someone has a dispute with an officer and it goes to court "the police officer's statement under oath is considered conclusive evidence under the Act."
The new regulations authorize police to use the powers starting on Monday, June 21 and police will have those powers until Monday, June 28 when the G20 delegates leave town.
Burrows said police have already made "two or three" arrests under the new rules as of Friday morning.
"We're bound by duty to protect the people that are going be within that fence line," said Burrows. "If you refuse to tell us [why you're there], then we have to assume that your purposes are not of a peaceful nature."
45 Comments so far
Show All'"use whatever force is necessary" to keep people out'
Wasn't "force" romanticized by the imperialists? But the cowboys can't rustle up the dogeys in Afghanistan. It looks like the forces of nature are getting the best of the imperialists. They don't seem to have a fighting chance.
sad to see canada continue down this road. so much for my plan c.
The public has nothing to fear? It seems the G20 delegates are the one who have something to fear - the people when they realise what the economic terroists (sorry G20 delegates) are up to.
What happens next? Some BAPF(*) legislator says 'it is so inefficient to keep introducing these limits and then removing them. Lets just keep them on the books all the time'
(*) BAPF = Bought And Paid For
I don't understand the tactics of the G8 - G20 protesters. They show up in numbers, clad in face-masks, usually doing some kind of silly thing like smearing coffee grounds on their faces or dancing on stilts. Then later, it all turns dark and the serious shit-disturbers start throwing rocks and doing damage. The media reports the antics, then later the crimes (yes vandalism is a crime, even if in protest), but almost never the protesters' actual point. And police powers grow along with the size of the security perimeter.
How on earth is any of this supposed to make the wider public aware of and sympathetic to the protesters concerns--or make the protesters seem credible? It doesn't. It makes them look like dicks, and who listens to dicks? And it makes the general population more sympathetic to the kind of harsh security measures we now see played out to the max in downtown Toronto. You see quotes from people in the paper from some seriously deluded people saying, "Well a billion dollars for security does seem like a lot, but what are the police supposed to do when these protesters start the violence?"
How on earth does attacking a phalanx of police accomplish anything, either? That's a battle the protesters are bound to lose. I'm sure it makes them feel useful to be arrested, but it does nothing to advance their cause and much to detract from it.
Tactically (and I'm not advocating this, just trying to think of other ways to make an impact), it might make better sense to take a page from the terrorists and, if you want to attack something, attack soft targets. Or from flash mobbers. Deliberately don't have even a single protest at the G20 site. Fan out across the city and cause disruption everywhere EXCEPT the G20 site. If you are inclined to smash windows, why go to where every window is covered with plywood? If you want to smash corporate symbols, why go to where every corporate symbol has been removed or covered up? There are plenty of corporate symbols in the rest of the city--and there are no cops. Or at least it would take them awhile to get to the east end from the downtown G20 site, and making them go there would actually reduce security at the site itself. They don't have the personnel to cover the whole city. Of course, you could argue that there is also no media there, but they'd get there soon enough, especially if you tip them off just in advance.
Personally, I would rather the protesters convene something like an X-20 summit, where they debate from a people-oriented, non-corporatist, non-statist, perspective the critical issues of the day. Perhaps the media would pay less attention, I don't know. But what did filter out would be less likely to be dismissed by the wider public.
Maybe these ideas suck, but nothing could be more damaging to the cause of alternative solutions than the idiotic tactics being used by protesters today.
The thing is that most people who protest are NOT engaging in the type of acts described in your first paragraph. The MSM chooses to show the rest of the world the more 'colorful' protesters while ignoring the rest. If not for the guy on stilts etc. the protests would garner no coverage at all.
Your idea I like most is for an alternative summit. That sounds somewhat like the World Social Forum that runs parallel to the World Economic Forum. Smashing windows in another part of town? Not so much.
No, smashing windows, me not so much either. As I said, just a theoretical discussion about more effective tactics, not advocating destruction of property. Trying to understand why the ones who DO engage in this activity make that (I think) ineffective choice. It may be true that power comes from the barrel of a gun, but it doesn't come from a rock through a window. That's just an expression of defeat.
Your point that most protesters are not engaging in destruction of property is absolutely true, and it's also absolutely true that the MSM prefers the antics of the kooks and the destroyers. But if there were no guys on stilts, coffee-covered kids and rock-throwing bandana sporters, the MSM wouldn't have that excuse. They would cover whatever protest there is; say, an alternative summit.
(I mean some wouldn't, but enough would that it would get serious attention. And frankly in these days of fewer reporters and greater reliance on the same wire service copy all over the internet, you only really need the wires at your summit and the news would be everywhere.)
I also don't know if the protesters (and even lumping them all into one noun is admittedly simplistic) have ever considered approaching the mainstream media's editorial boards with their ideas, and with ideas about how the MSM could better cover their protests. I'm not kidding. When I was a journalist on the city beat for a radio and TV network (yes the MSM, I admit it), I and my bosses routinely met with diverse and alternate groups in the city to find out more about their issues and this greatly informed our coverage of civic groups, especially those representing marginalized members of society.
My point is that it is possible to infiltrate and harness the MSM to some degree and use it to your advantage, instead of simply lumping it all under one noun (or acronym) and pronouncing it the enemy. Another effective tactic to use the media would be to get some of your people hired at newspapers. You couldn't foam at the mouth at story meetings, and you'd probably want to cover your Che tattoo at the interview :) but once in, you could certainly present alternative points of view that filter through into story assignment, story selection, and selection of interviewees. I see it happen all the time; I've done it.
Anyway, it's frustrating to see all this energy going toward attracting attention to one's tactics, rather than one's cause.
"My point is that it is possible to infiltrate and harness the MSM to some degree and use it to your advantage..."
Um, yeah. About that whole 'change the system from within' thing. It doesn't work. You make compromises, cut a deal here, change a word there... next thing you know, you're working FOR the system you sought to change. Happens every time.
The reason why the political theatre happens at these protests is because the people who actually want to effect change KNOW that they can't buy into the system without selling their souls. Unfortunately, this passion makes them easy targets for the psy-ops of POlice informants and infiltrators. Damned if you do and all that.
So what do you do? Here are some possibilities:
1 - Assume that any social protest group that is not aligned with the right wing agenda WILL be infiltrated.
2 - As soon as any charismatic new face who shows up and makes an obvious effort to fit in starts motivating people to break windows, torch cars or engage the Police in violence, throw him/her out on their ass after getting their picture. Distribute said picture and alias/name far and wide in the activist community with the flag 'Police Mole!'
3 - Look for the 'activists' and 'protestors' wearing issue duty boots. It's a give away during a protest who they are working for. At the same time, take lots of pictures of people pointing cameras with large lenses at you.
4 - When (not if) shit starts getting broken, watch what the police do with the vandals. If they are not immediately pepper sprayed, plasti-cuffed, and treated to the kindnesses of the officers, watch to see if they are 'escorted' rather than carried off to a police vehicle. If the police seem more concerned about the persons safety than the average protester, congratulations! You just found an agent provocateur. Here in Vancouver on the opening day of the Olympics the front line of black clad 'protestors' started smashing windows and cars. The VPD did nothing, allowing the 'anarchists' to 'escape' down alleys right past them.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
All of that is just excellent advice.
Just a couple of things: I didn't say you can change the system entirely from within; I said to a degree. And a single degree is more than the protesters are accomplishing with the tactics I have decried above. Like it or not, the people you are trying to reach read the MSM, so if you're not there, you aren't going to reach them. Infiltrate. In other words, use the same tactics you seem to think are so successful when the police do it. You don't make it your only tactic, but you have to have a lot of different arrows in your quiver.
"You make compromises, cut a deal here, change a word there... next thing you know, you're working FOR the system you sought to change. Happens every time." Give me an example or two if you would.
I'm sorry you feel that anyone working within the system is some kind of patsy-in-the-making, and that you have to be entirely outside the system in order to change it. In fact, I don't really see how that is possible, as most change happens from within. But I think you don't want to change the system, you want to change systems altogether, so perhaps from that perspective you are right.
The problem is the inability or resistence of the left, especially the radical left to change. They cannot bring themselves to realize changes or to stop behavior that is essentially self satisfying regardless of its effectiveness or not.
Yes, I agree. The radical left is incredibly conservative (ie resistant to change) in this respect.
If only a million could show up and just sit down in the streets. Just sit quietly and do nothing else. No signs, no bullhorns, no violence, no speaking. Just sit. Two million would be even better.
The photo shows a line of young police/security persons practicing 'the look'. It would be funny if it weren't so sad. That's public monies paying for another assault on civil liberties.
You would think an economic conference would be a dull, boring affair full of esoteric policy and lots of jargon. The public must realize by now that something is very wrong with international economic affairs, so wrong that it's worthy of protest and to the extent that massive defensive measures are taken against citizen outrage.
In a better world, the public would be invited inside to view the proceedings that may discuss and decide major movements of our common funds and resources. Instead, we are treated as outsiders, suspects, and potential enemies.
But not so much when the elite is not only deciding the future of the human race but divvying up the world amongst themselves.
"The public has nothing to fear with this legislation and the way the police will use this legislation," said Burrows. "It really comes down to a case of common sense and officer discretion. If you're approaching that fence line, we want to know why."
Translation: The bought and paid for politicians are scared witless they will have to interact with the public. If you approach the place they are hiding, we will get the information we need to open a police file on you, put you under surveillance, and harass you every time someone says 'boo!' to a politician.
"Under the new regulations, anyone who comes within five metres of the security area is obliged to give police their
name and state the purpose of their visit.
Police, at their discretion, can deny access to the area and "use whatever force is necessary" to keep people out."
Translation: Nothing to see here. Move along. Those with no intent to disturb the poo-bahs have nothing to fear. Otherwise we will tear gas, Taser, baton, LRAD and water cannon your stupid civilian ass.
"The regulation also says that if someone has a dispute with an officer and it goes to court "the police officer's statement under oath is considered conclusive evidence under the Act."
Translation: We learned our lesson from the Robert Dzekanski affair. Now we will simply go with whatever the officer says happened, assume you are guilty, and prosecute to silence in order to crush any possible demonstration of dissent next time. Get the message: We are here to win your hearts and minds, or we will burn your motherf***ing houses to the ground!
"We're bound by duty to *protect the people that are going be within that fence line* (!)," said Burrows. "If you refuse to tell us [why you're there], then we have to assume that your purposes are not of a peaceful nature."
No translation needed. The police are there to serve the whim of the Elite. Get close and the Police will definitely go for maximum force.
I wonder how many police 'agent provocateurs' will be out on the fence line, encouraging protesters to charge the line and give the police an excuse to get the party started...
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
"... the police officer's statement under oath is considered conclusive evidence under the Act."
What a relief! At last the (Canadian) police have been decreed in law to be unable to lie. No more lies by the police - they are by definition not lying. If a policeman says it, it's the truth. A police officer can't make mistakes. Nor lie. - Because the law says anything a police officer says goes. That's the truth. By definition. In law.
So good to have all those futile discussions of what really happened in a given situation out of the way! No more need to hear more sides than one, not even to clarify an issue.
The police officers are always right.
That's the part that gave me the cauld grues, too. The implicit fascism (there's no other word that suits) is just too much to bear.
All of these techniques are being imported from the mighty and righteous State of Israel. The poster child for such tactics and behavior. "If Israel says so, it must be true" should be their motto.
The serious misunderstanding of protests by "commenter" above, a self-ordained spokesperson for the public, is sad evidence of the effectiveness of the hypnotic power of the media. Too few citizens have read about or participated in real democratic action, let alone the principles of non-violent protest.
To properly understand does not require vast study, but it does require standing apart from the mesmerizing disinformation produced by the major media moguls. That basic step outside the mainstream is frightening for many who have never read carefully Thoreau's _On the Duty of Civil Disobedience_, a mere 50 pages of powerful theory. Gandhi's _An Autobiography_ is worth reading slowly once every year. And Gene Sharp's _The Politics of Nonviolent Action_, especially part two "The Methods of Nonviolent Action" teach one what to look for among the demonstrators at a G-20 Summit.
If you've never participated, you probably are skeptical about the police-infiltration element "initiating" violence. But once you have, you know that there are self-righteous people who thrive on infiltration and subversion of protests. Protest organizers must be highly pro-active in suppressing such events as planned by such people.
Watch _The Battle in Seattle_ (2007) as an introduction to your reading. Then slowly, carefully read Thoreau, Gandhi, and Sharp. Enough of us have grown skeptical of corporatism, capitalism, and fascism to not take newscasts at face value.
We even have to be careful of trolls commenting in Common Dreams. But keeping personally clear about the philosophy, practice, and methods of nonviolent action will enable each of us to appreciate what's going on during a G-20 protest.
Protesters must not allow themselves to disbelieve in their own "force." Police authorized to "use whatever force is necessary" redefine _force_ into a seriously erring notion of what _force_ means. If we allow the "police" to redefine _force_, _security_, _peace_, and _justice_, we fall into their trap.
Then, "if someone has a dispute with an officer and it goes to court "the police officer's statement under oath is considered conclusive evidence under the Act," the dispute is, ipso facto, the demonstrator's problem--regardless of the stupidity of the assertion. They become the good guys and we become the bad guys.
The protesters have to maintain control of the discourse. And we can.
Freedom to assemble? Freedom to have grievances addressed? Freedom of speech? Fredom of expression?
Yes, for the global elite and neo-aristocracy. Serfs, workers, citizens, peons and rabble will be gassed, beaten, imprisoned and abused by armed thugs who are loyal to the elite, yet are paid by the public.
Now that is what I call a free and fair society.
The simple solution is to stay 6m (20 ft) back. they drew the line; use it against them. the policemans word is only sacrosanct for things that occur inside the area so make them cross the line.
this BS "law" would never stand up to a charter challenge.
a blatent violation of Section 11.
Yes...And there should be legal observers a-plenty...
While the officer's word is supposed to be undisputable evidence within the 5m zone, what this really means is that as long as the officer testifies that an incident happened within the 5m zone - regardless of where it actually happened - their testimony is sacrosanct.
http://www.nlg.org/resources/legal-observing/
Those protesters better start packing measuring tapes.
Get Canada back to being Canada the way it was when the First Nations ran it. That's read democracy. That's the real Canada, the one we gotta love.
Until that happens we need to know what the Europeans' law is in Canada. It's not quite as bad as the USA, but it's not for lack of some of right wing there trying. If Canada were like it was even when Pierre Elliot Trudeau's Liberals were in power, it would be much better. But the Liberals today have left that behind.
We will all need good Canadian lawyers who know that charter provision already referred to. But it will all depend on how the courts in Canada will interpret that.
AD
The problem with the Justice system as currently constructed is this.
At the AIPAC Conference the courts ruled that the Charter rights of Canadians were violated in almost every instance. The ONLY repercussion was a slap on the wrist and a resignation or two. A fine might be paid out of the treasury to those whose rights have been the most "violated".
That fine is just taxpayer dollars. Those that commit the crimes never really suffer a consequence. Every time there another such conference and "rights violated" we go through the same process again.
In essence the "Authorities" and the "police forces" keep public ORDER by continual violations of the Charter while seeing the fines paid and the admonishments of the courts AFTER the fact as "The cost of doing Business".
Those people hiding in Fortress Toronto need to eat don't they? And go to the bathroom, and sleep at night? General strikes are great, even just a strike of all caterer's staff and all hotel workers and all janitors would be good. Strikes and boycotts are two of the most effective non-violent tools.
"The regulation also says that if someone has a dispute with an officer and it goes to court "the police officer's statement under oath is considered conclusive evidence under the Act."
Just last week a report was released on the tragic death of a man at the Vancouver airport after being Tasered repeatedly. The four policemen involved lied blatantly about what happened and only a cellphone video by an observer helped the real story come out. The video was confiscated by police at the scene and was only released after a legal challenge. We all know that police officers' statements aren't always truthful, oath or no oath. I can't believe what is happening in my country. I thought we were better than this.
"I know not with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
Apparently, it will be with drones.
Michael Hudson's new article about economics can be found at:
http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson06252010.html
In the article, he talks, at length, about the rhetoric -- prosperity through austerity.
Wow Kay, we are on "the same page": I just finished reading that (but then again I am a fan of Hudson's).
Also I just checked out Webster Tarpley's latest stuff as well on http://tarpley.net/ which I also recommend.
Thanks for the link to tarpley.net. I read it, and I wept!
I've never been a big fan of George Soros, and his billions made in hedge funds. Several weeks ago, I read a lengthy article about U.S. economic forces planning to undermine Europe and the Euro -- after the Greek crisis came to light and we learned that Goldman Sachs, together with previous Greek government officials, conspired to prop up the Greek economy. What a mess!
I'm also a big fan of Michael Hudson's. Each week, counterpunch publishes quite a few well-researched articles on economic issues, and other issues as well. Therefore, daily, I check the site.
Me too! - 'Socialist', 'Kay Johnson':
- Huge fan of Michael Hudson. Simply because he's onto the real premises and basics of economics. His critique of Compound Interest as the driver of unsustainability in the world, is priceless (even with "Compound Interest", ha-ha).
Other greats on economics: Mike Whitney, Ellen Brown, Pam Martens - and of course, Paul Craig Roberts.
:-)
smarter: I agree -- I read all of the journalists you listed -- more often than not, on counterpunch.
Two or three weeks ago, I cheered when I ran across a Paul Craig Roberts article -- he had retired. But, he's back!
Yup.. Here we go again. More Fascist crackdown, now in Toronto. ANY of this is surprising?
The imbecile 'Sgt. Tim Burrows' needs to be publicly reviled, by stand-up copmedians, letters to the editor, BIG signs planted on the lawn of his house in the middle of the night, graffiti painted on the police station walls, for making the statement 'the public has nothing to fear..'
This guy is mentally retarded, or a brainless robot, a mind-controlled slave, someone who hasn't enough sense to find a more dignified way to make a living, part of the problem, all of the above. Fuck him, and fuck his police force and government.
This 'G8/G20' feudal bullshit is going to come to a head, and it ain't going to be pretty. You're right, jake ,in reminding us of Einstein's 'WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones.' And it's coming pretty fucking quick. We can speed up the process, if only we could get enough people to cooperate in strangling the G-crowd of food, water, beds, flights, guns, anything. Cut 'em off.
For that matter, fuck his horse too.
Talk about timing! As I read CD, I'm listening to this very report on DemocracyNow! As this broke out, I got the eery sense that the Apocalypse is nearing. And not necessarily in a religious sense but more in a Terminator or Mad Maxx kind of way.
And, coincidentally, just this morning, I was at the airport and witnessed something that made me sick to my stomach. This "brown" man, nice but Arab[ish] kind of looking tried to go thru the metal detector and set it off. Immediately, the mentally-retarded heroes of the Department of Homeland Scrutiny (or is it the TSA?) descended on him. Next thing I know, they're patting down this poor man in front of everyone. And I don't mean a casual pat but a thorough, invasive groping which entailed the running of their filthy paws thru his genital area. The spectacle was so utterly humilliating and disgusting! Oh, man, how that brings back bad memories of my days under Communism and the things those barbarians used to do to the populace to brake their will into submission.
Fear no more, sheeple, the barbarians are at the gate!
To paraphrase Reagan (yeah, I know, I know but this one really is worth quoting), the most terrifying words in the English language are "The public has nothing to fear with this legislation and the way the police will use this legislation."
Unless you get within five feet of that legislation.
Sieg Effing Heil, Baby!!
I have always believed that if the pooh bahs in charge are made to look as silly as their rules, then the "powers" of the police are negated.
So, we have a situation where, NO one can come within 5 metres, and if approaching the fence, a person must produce, name and purpose, and possibly be frisked. Then , if a person is arrested, the police person's version will be considered to have more weight. ((Wow, video won't count?)
Well this certainly sounds like Arizona, doesn't it? With Canada and Mexico starting Drone zones too, well what are we becoming?
Here's what I suggest to any Americans going to protest. Public theatre is a wonderful thing..
Three areas of costume would be nice.
1) The cactus people, dressed as catci to represent the 'fence" ( all within 5 metres, mind you.)
2) The Drone people, although, these would be dressed in bee costumes ( you know, drones.) Their job would be to patrol just inside of the cactus fence people.
3) The Free Speech people, who could wear all kinds of fun hats, like Paul Revere, or even hats with giant Mick Jagger lips on them, you know , for FREE Speech.
These Free Speech people would all face away from the fence, as their purpose is to give an organized discussion of why these paranoid governments are so crazy. Besides by ignoring the police, they might be able to instruct them too ( if the police had no one to arrest but only had words to hear!)
The costuming would entertain and instruct, and bring the media, but the FREE SPEECHERS would be there to instruct on how to behave in the face of corporate oligarchy.
I wouldn't give the police a chance to touch anybody, and the message of WE the PEOPLE, no matter whether one is in Canada, or Arizona could be made a lot more clear.
Boy, those guys (and gals) sure do look like a bunch of thugs. I almost feel sorry for all those post-grads that had to polish up their resumes and credentials to move to Canada back when the US attacked Afghanistan and Iraq (I live in a college town). Who would have thunk that Canada would become a fascist police-state so quickly? I'm almost glad I couldn't make the grade - I was going to move there too. (I have distant relatives in Quebec). Sure must be hiding something awful to require such a bunker mentality... but we all know that already.
Erst Huntsville, nachst Toronto, dan die Welt.
The Corporate Crusades are no different from
the Christian Crusades . . .
It's all fascism and it requires violence to "convert"
the public.
Torture was reintroduced by our own US government not to
protect us from alleged terrorists, but to intimidate the
public. That's the main purpose of torture.
Militarizing the police -- our public servants -- has
been going on for decades. The Drug War has been a handy
tool for doing just that.
Wake up, America!!
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
The title of this article should be: "Global Corporate Mafia Grants Itself Unlimited Class Warfare Powers to Enforce Fortress [insert city name from anywhere on the planet here]"
Police state protection for a G-20 meeting on how to save a wheezing/dying financiers' monetary empire. This will probably be the last meeting of these "agents-of-empire" before they are R.I.F.-ed & reassignied to the trashcan of history, to write clueless memoirs nobody will read. To protest them is pointless. Their time in the sun is almost over. I'd rather read more stories on the social forum meetings & the 13 Grandmothers council. That is the future.