G-20 Summit in Toronto

[urbandreamer]

Steve Paikin and his Guardian buddy are such babies...they come from the old-school world that journalists are somehow above the law, privileged folk who should be treated with respect. I saw such behavior from their crowd on Saturday--disgusting.

They should be lucky they were in Toronto, Canada, and not some Middle Eastern country (where ironically, the Guardian reporter lives.)

 

[CityPainter]

Steve Paikin,

"I have reported from war zones in Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, Lebanon, and Israel.

But last night's confrontation between peaceful demonstrators and riot squad police was the scariest situation I've ever been in, in almost 30 years of reporting."

We have spent a lot of time questionning people's judgement in real time and under stress. This is an example how, even after a chance for sober reflection, a seasoned reporter can exhibit bad judgement. While Paikin is only referring to his very personal experiences, it is was irresponsible to draw ANY parallel between our G20, where there were no serious injuries, and the ethnic cleansing and near genocide in the former Yugoslavia.

Paiken is not saying that the Toronto G20 was worse than the war in the former Yugoslavia. He is saying that his personal experience at the Toronto protests felt more dangerous than his personal experience covering that other conflict. That is a quite different thing from what you have implied, and he is the only person who can make that judgment call.

Steve Paikin and his Guardian buddy are such babies...they come from the old-school world that journalists are somehow above the law, privileged folk who should be treated with respect. I saw such behavior from their crowd on Saturday--disgusting.

They should be lucky they were in Toronto, Canada, and not some Middle Eastern country (where ironically, the Guardian reporter lives.)

I keep seeing this similar sentiment expressed on here and in other discussions, and I don't find it to be useful. Canada is not a repressed, war-torn dictatorship: that is the whole point of our outrage. I would certainly hope that our police and legal system are held to far higher standards than simply being less brutal than some hypothetical repressive regime in the Middle East.

And in what way are the detained journalists deeming themselves to be "above the law"? I have yet to hear evidence of any journalist engaging in "black bloc" type vandalism or criminal activity. Based on what I have seen and heard, they were simply present in the vicinity of protests while trying to document a newsworthy event as it happened. In short, they were simply doing their jobs, and I'm quite sure that journalism is not a crime. Many were wearing large badges identifying themselves as accredited journalists, and carrying very expensive cameras and other equipment that would clearly not be carried by any violent anarchist. The police, for some reason, often chose to disregard this. All many of us would like to know is... why? Without explanation, it is not unreasonable that some might deduce that the police did not want their activities to be documented because they were doing something wrong.

 

[insertrealname]

If only, if only, if only...

I haven't been following this thread for some time, so maybe this has already been speculated about ad nauseam...

Interesting video from a high vantage point of Sunday's kettle manoeuvre at Spadina/Queen W. (ignore the potty on-camera commentary). If only the police could have used similar tactics to stop the hoodlums on Saturday afternoon en route from the riot at Spadina/Queen W. to the next riot north of Yonge/Queen. They certainly seem to have the training to do that kind of unpleasant crowd confinement operation.

Perhaps it was poor on-the-ground intelligence (too much reliance on CCTV cameras), inflexible command and deployment structures that led to the police missing their chance north of Adelaide (once past the intersection, there were relatively few "Whose Streets? Our Streets!" style protestors), where gawkers might have been scared off and the cordon set in place.

The police are human too, of course, and may simply have chosen the less riskier action.

If only, if only, if only... I just hate to see mistrust, fear and disengagement with politics gain further ground in public life as a result of the disorder and the police actions such as we all saw in Toronto.

 

[gristle]

We know that most cops when confronted with real danger will run in the opposite direction - Unlike Fireman who run towards the source of danger, most cops are cowards - an example of this are the cops that ran from their cruisers before the cars were torched.

Why don't you just speak for yourself when airing your personal prejudices. Just to inform you, members of the police are human beings and can be injured just like anyone else. Your problem is your willful bias and ideological blindness. Police wear the gear that they do in order to protect themselves from physical injury.

The police officers who were in those cars on Queen Street could have been severely injured or possibly killed (the vehicles were being used as an escort). The windows of their vehicles had been smashed, and when they were forced to abandon those cars, members of the crowd proceeded to throw things at them. You call that defensive action cowardice, but they were trying to protect themselves. It's a human response. Clearly, you don't want to see that because you fail to recognize that they are human beings. It all raises a curiosity as to how you would realistically act if a bunch of angry people would be throwing objects at you.

As for the firefighters, the response time to the Queen Street torching of police cars was slow because there was a very real concern for their own safety. Some members of mobs hate when their fires get put out, and there have been past incidences in other places of firefighters and their vehicles being attacked. As was noted, when the police showed up, they had to do so in large numbers in order to reduce the possibility of a violent confrontation - that's why overwhelming numbers are used: to reduce the risk of violence. Tear gas could not be used because of the proximity of nearby homes.

The fact is that the violent black bloc protesters operate to create havoc and to incite violence. They are the people who provoked the situation and are the ones who caused damage to the city. Like parasites, they hid among peaceful marchers and completely undermined those events. Anyone who refuses to see this is blinded by petty ideology.

 

[buildup]

Police are not paid to single handedly take on mobs, but that doesn't make them cowards.

"Paiken is not saying that the Toronto G20 was worse than the war in the former Yugoslavia. He is saying that his personal experience at the Toronto protests felt more dangerous than his personal experience covering that other conflict. That is a quite different thing from what you have implied, and he is the only person who can make that judgment call."

Please read my response so I dont have to retype it. Why is Paikin's personal experience important? He is a REPORTER, its not about HIM. His comment is ridiculous if you take it to the extreme. What if he had said the G20 was more frightening to him than Rwanda or the Holocaust?

 

[buildup]

"We know that most cops when confronted with real danger will run in the opposite direction - Unlike Fireman who run towards the source of danger, most cops are cowards - an example of this are the cops that ran from their cruisers before the cars were torched."

This is the comment on an infant. So, you are forgiven. Or that of a retard, also forgivable in enlightened society.

 

[CityPainter]

"We know that most cops when confronted with real danger will run in the opposite direction - Unlike Fireman who run towards the source of danger, most cops are cowards - an example of this are the cops that ran from their cruisers before the cars were torched."

This is an absolutely unhelpful comment, and no way reflects the opinion of those of us who are simply asking for some answers in the form of an objective inquiry. Generalizations like this don't help the discourse, and only make it easier for the rest of us to be written off as anti-police, which I am not. Rampant generalizations in either direction (all cops are cowards, all protesters are criminals) won't get us anywhere.

"Paiken is not saying that the Toronto G20 was worse than the war in the former Yugoslavia. He is saying that his personal experience at the Toronto protests felt more dangerous than his personal experience covering that other conflict. That is a quite different thing from what you have implied, and he is the only person who can make that judgment call."

Please read my response so I dont have to retype it. Why is Paikin's personal experience important? He is a REPORTER, its not about HIM. His comment is ridiculous if you take it to the extreme. What if he had said the G20 was more frightening to him than Rwanda or the Holocaust?

I take it as editorial, an it is not being represented as factual evidence. The opinion of a person who has been to a war zone is important to me, because I have never been in that situation. If he says he felt more frightened for his safety here than in a war zone, that's a notable comment. Whether we choose to believe it or write it off as hyperbole is another matter. I agree that it sounds a bit overblown, however he may have been surrounded by more security and protection in a war zone than he was on the Esplanade on Saturday night, and hence may have indeed felt more exposed to harm at that time.

EDIT: Looks like this thread has degenerated into name calling on both sides; since I've said my bit, I guess it's time to unsubscribe and move on -- sad it always ends this way.

 

[Sir Novelty Fashion]

Why is Paikin's personal experience important? He is a REPORTER, its not about HIM. His comment is ridiculous if you take it to the extreme. What if he had said the G20 was more frightening to him than Rwanda or the Holocaust?

Er, all comments are ridiculous when you take them to the extreme. That's kind of the definition of "extreme." Most especially when you throw in the Holocaust for good measure. And yes, reporting is most always about the reporter; stylistically, the convention is to pretend that it isn't. Personal reporting is an established and honest way of doing it.

But I'd also point out that, at this stage in the game, you two have very literally become two guys on the Internet calling each other retards. So I hope you don't mind if I suggest that you've both lost the argument.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

A little levity in the middle of all this bedlam. A crazed consumer looses his marbles when he can't shop at the Eaton Centre during it's lock-down on Saturday. Catch it before it gets taken down, it's been pulled once already.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXIE2uOdnkQ

 

[Coltaine79]

A little levity in the middle of all this bedlam. A crazed consumer looses his marbles when he can't shop at the Eaton Centre during it's lock-down on Saturday. Catch it before it gets taken down, it's been pulled once already.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXIE2uOdnkQ

Taken down by UT moderators... or taken down by Youtube?


BTW, I'm starting to get sick and tired of these youtube videos but I found this one interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeG_t9abaSU

It appears to be footage of undercover guys at some point during the Saturday or Sunday. I'm no expert, but from the "stance" utilized while holding the nightstick, I'd say they really are all UC's.

And unfortunately, at one point, it does look like a "black bloc" individual joining their line.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

For those who are somehow ignorant of the abuses and general behaviour of the (riot) police (surely because you were away from downtown during the weekend), here are some videos, and here.

Really? I saw an idiot move in front of a horse (perhaps by mistake, perhaps on purpose). Would you jump infront of a moving vehicle? Why would you even come close????

The guy that had his camera "smashed" was taunting police and not following police instruction to move back. That's police brutality, if an officer asks me to move back oh I don't know MAYBE I MOVE THE F**K BACK AND STOP TAUNTING POLICE.

Face it many people went looking for something to bitch about and then whine about it.

 

[buildup]

I apologize to anyone I've offended.

It's actuallly similar to the G20 event we're debating - very different, strongly held, sincere perspectives causing a ruckus overwhelming the more balanced discussion. Then settling down completely.

That's the most interesting part, how afterwards it's almost like it never happened.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Everyone (protesters, onlookers, media, and cops) wanted a minor ruckus and that's exactly what they got.

 

[Peepers]

Really? I saw an idiot move in front of a horse (perhaps by mistake, perhaps on purpose). Would you jump infront of a moving vehicle? Why would you even come close????

Is this the video you are referring to?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-p64RHqi38


What I see here is the complete disregard for human life by the cops. The poor guy had his back to the horses and so he probably didn't realize that they were coming in his direction so quickly. I know some cop-defenders like you will call him an "idiot" and blame him for being in the way but do you really believe this guy WANTED to get trampled by a team of horses?

On the other hand there can be NO DOUBT that the cops saw this man and yet they made NO EFFORT TO STOP the horses. Instead they willfully charged forward knowing full well that they were subjecting this man to the possibility of severe injury or death.

I have no doubt that the officers involved probably relished the idea of inflicting physical harm on this man. Notice how NONE of the cops stopped to check on his condition?

These are the kind of people that we have "protecting" us!

Disgusting!

 

[WillC]

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=455347&id=681970186&l=83cd8e10af

This is a link to a Facebook page, which has images of the guy who trashed the cop car, whom many people suspect of being a cop himself. The person seems quite identifiable. If the police wanted to catch him, surely they could.