G-20 Summit in Toronto

[Peepers]

Has anyone heard if things at the Seoul summit were as chaotic as they were in Toronto?

I don't know about chaos but one thing that is very different about Seoul is the cost of security. Seoul is spending only $24 Million for 3 days security meanwhile Bill Blair blew $124 MILLION on extra security for the 2 day event and he didn't even have responsibility for the G20 secure zone around the convention centre! And despite spending all of that money Blair could not (or would not) intervene to stop ANY of the black block vandals when they went on a rampage. Nor was Blair able (or willing more likely) to PROTECT the RIGHT of Canadian to protest peacefully.

I just do not understand how Blair is able to keep his job or avoid arrest for his conduct which I believe was illegal (breach of trust).

Of course all of those people who said that Harper was irresponsible for holding the G20 "in a big city like Toronto" (e.g. David Miller, Bill Blair, and Blair apologist Alok Mukherjee) sure look stupid right about now as Seoul Korea with a population of 20 Million people wraps up hosting the G20 without a hitch !

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/888914--compromise-needed-to-salvage-g20-seoul-summit

 

[nfitz]

I don't know about chaos but one thing that is very different about Seoul is the cost of security.

I've read Seoul is using 60,000 troops. This is a lot cheaper, given that the Korean army is effectively still in a state of war with a standing military of over 600,000 and reserves of over 3,000,000. With the military headquartered in Seoul, and many troops based nearby (remember the distance from downtown Seoul to North Korea is about the same from downtown Toronto to Oakville), they likely aren't dealing with the massive food, housing, and transporation costs. Nor would they have to pay wages.

There's no way one can expect to be able to compare costs between the two security operations.

Even if they didn't use their military, the metropolitan area around Seoul has a larger population than Ontario and Quebec combined. Many more police available who they don't have to pay room and board for.

 

[tkip]

Is it really fair to blame Blair for all the costs involved with the security for our G20? Isn't that a decision that would have been made above his head further up the command? I think it's a little too easy and convient to use Blair as a scapegoat. As for the same mob showing up? I've been told by several people over the years that a lot of these people don't actually care about what they're protesting. Just there to cause trouble. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Peepers]

There's no way one can expect to be able to compare costs between the two security operations.

OK then, how about this for a comparison. Every year New York hosts the UN General Assembly. It is the biggest gathering of world leaders anywhere with 192 countries represented. The General Assembly runs from September to December. The Annual UN General Assembly DWARFS the G20 in terms of security requirements.

So what does the extra security cost the city of New York? Legendary NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly gets the job done for just $7 Million! (see link below)

There can be no reasonable explanation for the staggering amount of money that Bill Blair blew on extra policing. Keep in mind that Blair did not even have responsibility for the G20 secure zone where all the leaders were!.

$124 Million represents 1/7th. the annual Toronto Police budget - 1/7 the annual budget was spent to provide extra security for 2 days - extra security that did not even include the Summit secure zone! How can anyone think that the amounts spent by Blair were reasonable? And lets not forget that for all the money spent Blair was unable or unwilling to confront and arrest any of the black block vandals as they went on a rampage breaking hundreds of windows. Blairs expensive police force just stood idly and watched the mayhem unfold

Should Blair be held responsible for the ridiculous amounts of money spent on policing within his jurisdiction? Damn right he should! It is obvious that he along with the other heads of security were given a blank cheque and he went on a spending spree without any regard for the taxpayer.

http://www.examiner.com/government-in-new-york/un-security-costs-high-as-general-assembly-convenes
_________________________________________________

Toronto G20 Exposed www.TorontoG20Exposed.ca

 

[nfitz]

There may be some valid points ...

... but it's hard to take it too seriously from someone who seems to be biased on the issue, given that they seem to trash our police department on an almost-daily basis ... and make comparisons to situations that are clearly not comparable.

 

[Parsnips]

Personally, I don't blame the officers for removing their badges...look what happened to people like "officer bubbles". And yeah, most of those people cause trouble- in all the videos that these people post they're seen mocking/taunting the police and getting completely outraged when they retaliate. The actions of the TPS were extreme, yet justifiable given the situation. And if people are going to bash the police, equal judgment should be held against the protesters who caused a lot of trouble. All I'm seeing is a double standard against the police by the media and, well, almost everybody.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Personally, I don't blame the officers for removing their badges...look what happened to people like "officer bubbles". And yeah, most of those people cause trouble- in all the videos that these people post they're seen mocking/taunting the police and getting completely outraged when they retaliate. The actions of the TPS were extreme, yet justifiable given the situation. And if people are going to bash the police, equal judgment should be held against the protesters who caused a lot of trouble. All I'm seeing is a double standard against the police by the media and, well, almost everybody.

There is no excuse for the officers to remove their identifying tags, sorry. I agree with you though that many of those peaceful protestors were there to simply agitate things and/or record only the recations of officers afer being taunted. Officer bubbles is a perfect example, sure he overreacted but honestly do you really belive that the woman blowing bubbles 3 feet away from an officer in his general direction during a time of high alert was doing so to prove some sort of peacefull point? Why couldn't she do it away from the officer? When the officer asked her to stop why didn't she stop? Could it be possible that she was doing it intentially in order to incite some sort of reaction? And how ironic that the camera just happened to be there to record it and not the verbal taunts yelled at the officers or any activity leading up to the confrontation.

To call the holding prison horrific quite simply ignores and minimizes some of the worst prison centres in history. To compare this to Nazi camps, or jails of dictators is IMHO a joke.

People, like you said, need to look at both sides of the conflict. Yes there were many innocent people who wound up caught up in all of this for no other reason than being at the wrong place at the wrong time. This was reported by people like Steve Paiken et al. However you must look at the actions of all the protesters there over the weekend and think to yourself "what exactly does this person's actions accomplish towards their protest, and did these actions exacerbate an already volitile situation?"

 

[Parsnips]

There is no excuse for the officers to remove their identifying tags, sorry. I agree with you though that many of those peaceful protestors were there to simply agitate things and/or record only the recations of officers afer being taunted. Officer bubbles is a perfect example, sure he overreacted but honestly do you really belive that the woman blowing bubbles 3 feet away from an officer in his general direction during a time of high alert was doing so to prove some sort of peacefull point? Why couldn't she do it away from the officer? When the officer asked her to stop why didn't she stop? Could it be possible that she was doing it intentially in order to incite some sort of reaction? And how ironic that the camera just happened to be there to record it and not the verbal taunts yelled at the officers or any activity leading up to the confrontation.

To call the holding prison horrific quite simply ignores and minimizes some of the worst prison centres in history. To compare this to Nazi camps, or jails of dictators is IMHO a joke.

People, like you said, need to look at both sides of the conflict. Yes there were many innocent people who wound up caught up in all of this for no other reason than being at the wrong place at the wrong time. This was reported by people like Steve Paiken et al. However you must look at the actions of all the protesters there over the weekend and think to yourself "what exactly does this person's actions accomplish towards their protest, and did these actions exacerbate an already volitile situation?"

I agree with you 100% about officer bubbles, I wasn't coming out against him. As a matter of fact the video of him cuts out the piece between him telling her to stop and her getting arrested making it look like she was arrested on completely illegitimate grounds. She obviously did something in the cut out piece that warranted for her arrest, but people ate it up anyway. I guess they see what they want to see.

While I agree the officers shouldn't have removed their badges because they were breaking regulation, I simply understand and can relate to those actions. Yeah, these protesters assume they can taunt, vandalize and mock with no consequences. So when they have to face the results of their actions, they get extremely angry and compare their treatment to the likes of the Soviet Unions free speech laws and Nazi Germany's concentration camps. An outrageous accusation and an immature reaction.

Regarding innocent people getting tossed in jail- desperate times call for desperate measures. We all knew many of them were going to be released without charges. It was very clear that going downtown on the weekend put you at risk for arrest. I was there on Sunday to see what happened, and I followed the police orders, and avoided the protesters because I didn't want to get lumped in with them. If I had been arrested, however, yes I would be ticked, but it would have been understandable under the circumstances.

People can protest- personally I believe it accomplishes nothing, there are much more effective ways to push an agenda through. But these people choose to criticize the very systems and people that make their lives as good as they are and, ironically enough, give them the right to protest in the first place.

 

[Dilla]

Regarding innocent people getting tossed in jail- desperate times call for desperate measures.

What was so desperate about the times?

 

[Parsnips]

What was so desperate about the times?

The damage, vandalism and harassment of police officers.

 

[Dilla]

The damage, vandalism and harassment of police officers.

A many, many, protesters where arrested without charge well before the violence started. Then, lo and behold, when things do start to get smashed up the tens of thousands of officers in the area are nowhere to be seen? If the cops were there to prevent disorder and destruction, then they may as well just have stayed home. I guess they preferred to go after the low hanging fruit.

Also, I submit that some kids throwing rocks and burning cop cars is not even remotely a good enough reason to suspend civil liberties. Moreover, these officers should be able to take some harassment without kicking ass. If someone harasses me, I'm not allow to beat the snot out of them, so why should the police be able to?

 

[Parsnips]

The police had bottles of piss and rocks thrown at them and the perpetrators at most got arrested in return. And why is it OK for people to torch cars, loot stores and attack officers but it's not OK for those officers to arrest the suspects in the area for 1. Perpetrating the crime and 2. Preventing more crime for taking place- (which did happen- in light of the enourmous amount of arrests, there was little to no violence on Sunday). The police are there for our protection and our properties protection. If a couple of civil liberties are temporarily halted to ensure our safety, I'm good with that. Every country has something like it. Enabling Canada's wartime act allowed the prevention of the spread of terrorism and fear from the the Quebec separatists back when they were more radical. If we all insisted on the black and white of civil liberties we would end up constantly being subject to violence of extremists without accountability, thus we would live in fear. Accountability stabilized the riots. That's why the violence ceased on Sunday. Because people realized that they were paying for what they did, and they didn't like that.

And no...most of the arrests took place after the violence in light of the damage. Just go read the news from that weekend. What is this "low hanging fruit" you accuse them of going after?

 

[Dilla]

A lot of people who were arrested didn't throw anything. Most.

It's not ok for people to torch anything, in fact what pisses me off most is that when the shit actually hit the fan, the police were nowhere to be seen. They are there for our protection and that of our property, but they failed miserably at their task, despite their enormous numbers and unprecedented powers of arrest. For the amount of money we spent on the police, we could have just let the Black Block type protesters run amok, pay for the clean up, and have plenty left in the bank. That's what happened anyway, minus a billion dollars to have the police stand around and watch it happen.

If we all insisted on the black and white of civil liberties we would end up constantly being subject to violence of extremists without accountability, thus we would live in fear.

Rubbish. Complete and utter rubbish. Besides, who's talking about black and white? The wartimes act being imposed could be justified in that case, as there was a real fear of something of a civil war breaking out. That situation is hardly comparable to a what happened here. I can live with some grey areas, but there was no imminent threat which justified the secret new police powers, nor the conduct of the police in this situation. This was not, as you've said, "desperate times".

Low hanging fruit? How about this...
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/07/07/g20-summit-police-protester-pruyn.html

This happened only after the city burned due to police indifference toward people who are actually committing destructive crimes. This is what I mean by low hanging fruit. There weren't any police going after those conducting a full blown riot, yet the people sitting around in the park got pummeled and arrested for nothing. Great job.

 

[doug]

And why is it OK for people to torch cars, loot stores and attack officers but it's not OK for those officers to arrest the suspects in the area for 1. Perpetrating the crime and 2. Preventing more crime for taking place-

It's not OK for people to torch cars....no one in this thread has suggested it is.
It's also OK for the police to arrest these people...no one has suggested otherwise.
However, the police chose to ignore the looting and torching and lazily stand idle...why is that OK?

 

[Parsnips]

A lot of people who were arrested didn't throw anything. Most.

It's not ok for people to torch anything, in fact what pisses me off most is that when the shit actually hit the fan, the police were nowhere to be seen. They are there for our protection and that of our property, but they failed miserably at their task, despite their enormous numbers and unprecedented powers of arrest. For the amount of money we spent on the police, we could have just let the Black Block type protesters run amok, pay for the clean up, and have plenty left in the bank. That's what happened anyway, minus a billion dollars to have the police stand around and watch it happen.

If we all insisted on the black and white of civil liberties we would end up constantly being subject to violence of extremists without accountability, thus we would live in fear.

Rubbish. Complete and utter rubbish. Besides, who's talking about black and white? The wartimes act being imposed could be justified in that case, as there was a real fear of something of a civil war breaking out. That situation is hardly comparable to a what happened here. I can live with some grey areas, but there was no imminent threat which justified the secret new police powers, nor the conduct of the police in this situation. This was not, as you've said, "desperate times".

Low hanging fruit? How about this...
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/07/07/g20-summit-police-protester-pruyn.html

This happened only after the city burned due to police indifference toward people who are actually committing destructive crimes. This is what I mean by low hanging fruit. There weren't any police going after those conducting a full blown riot, yet the people sitting around in the park got pummeled and arrested for nothing. Great job.

You're talking about black and white saying that harrassed officers, destroyed property and torched cars is better than having some supposedly innocent people thrown into jail for a day. I never defended the governments expenditure or strategy- I have no idea why they wern't there at that time, and obivously better planning was needed.

As for the people at Queens Park, I recall seeing these "peacful" protestors refusing to listen to police orders and chosing to harrass them instead. The police were there because that's where they expected the violence to be...once again, they required better planning. And I suggest you get your news on the matter from a source that doesn't have a tendency to side with the underdog regardless of the situation. It wasn't indifference, when they got to the people who were trashing stuff, they arrested them. And they sure as hell weren't pummeled and arrested for nothing. Put yourself in the shoes of the officers and those who actually care for the people's safety for once, why don't you.

And I will defend my statement about civil liberties. If they chose to protect these people's "liberties", they wouldn't have been able to track down and arrest any of the perpetrators and make a statement. And, sorry, you don't consider the looting of stores, the burning of cars and the torment of officers a situation for which drastic action is required?