G20: Who ordered the police to break their principles?

12 posts / 0 new

Last post

Thu, 2011-01-06 08:24

Tigana

G20: Who ordered the police to break their principles?

Who ordered the police to break their principles?

1. Police Services shall be provided in accordance with the following principles:

(1) The need to ensure the safety and security of all persons and property in Ontario.

(2) The importance of safeguarding the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Code, 1981.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p15_e.htm

To: National Media <[email protected]>

From: Joe Hueglin <[email protected]>

Subject: Unfinished 2010 business: determining who gave orders to the police G20 weekend, June 26th-27th.

"This has been a momentous year for Canada and we can all be proud of the many successes achieved both here at home and around the world," concluded the Prime Minister's New Years message. http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news.asp?category=1&id=3861&featureId=6&pageId=26 . Unfortunately "a momentous year" as well in terms of orders being given to police that went against their stated purposes. *

This video, http://underoccupation.com/g20/ , reviews events in a time sequence. Action being taken against individuals by the police before the weekend. No response, though forces were available, directed at apprehending those committing illegal acts over a 90 minute period. Then, after telltale clothing was removed and the perpetrators blended into those present at the designated rallying park, police who had been gathered together charged against all present. An action physically wounding some and leading to random arrests. Actions which became the norm the remainder of the evening of June 26th, 2010 and the day of June 27th.

What was the rationale for the hiatus in police action against the Black Bloc activists.? As recorded such had been taken against individuals before the formal G20 meeting and were in such a magnitude taken subsequently? At what level of decision making and by whom were these decisions made? Answers to these questions have not as yet been entered into a public record.

Can such orders be given again leading to the arrest and incarceration Canadians peaceably protesting, or coming out of a restaurant or seeking to enter a domicile ? At this point the answer must be "Yes". Those who did so can order such police actions again for nothing has changed.

It is argued here a "Public judicial Inquiry into Toronto G20" remains a necessity so the chain of command resulting in this abuse of power be known. Be known and lead to those with decision making, order giving powers when considering giving the police orders resulting in Canadians being mistreated as recorded in http://underoccupation.com/g20/ know that they will be held publicly responsible and accountable.

Issues Pages:

G8-G20

Civil Liberties Watch

Thu, 2011-01-06 07:23

Slumberjack

The cops have no principles, other than those dispensed upon the public by their corporate overseers in power.

Thu, 2011-01-06 08:23

Maysie

Hey Tigana.

I'm deleting the name and phone number in your opening post. In the future, unless something is clearly a press release, which your OP doesn't seem like it is, do not post full names of people and especially don't post their phone numbers, unless they are public figures like MPs.

I'm also moving this to "central canada".

And I would say the "principles" of the police are what was behind the concerted yet disorganized behaviour in Toronto at the G20. Principles of violence, intimidation, illegal detention on the streets and in jails/detention centres.

Business as usual. No principles were violated.

It was simply who the targets were, and the mass numbers of them, that made G20 exceptional. Oh, and the deliberate targetting of known activists around the country, before, during and after G20. Some of whom are still in jail or under despicable bail conditions (Alex Hundert, Jaggi Singh, Stefan Christof, Harsha Wallia).

Thu, 2011-01-06 08:36

humanity4all

"Who ordered police to break their principles", Where do orders come from in hierachical systems?

Fri, 2011-01-07 05:18

Tigana

Maysie wrote:

Hey Tigana.

I'm deleting the name and phone number in your opening post. In the future, unless something is clearly a press release, which your OP doesn't seem like it is, do not post full names of people and especially don't post their phone numbers, unless they are public figures like MPs.

I'm also moving this to "central canada".

Joe Hueglin released this to the press and usually attaches his contact information to everything he posts.

Joe Hueglin was a Conservative MP -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Hueglin

Joe Hueglin is a frequent writer of letters to editors and now works with the National Council of the Progressive Canadian Party.

The real PC's, the true Tories have returned - Harper just stole their name to get us to trust him while he sold Canada out.

http://progressivecanadian.ca/

Joe Hueglin's daily news digest is here -

http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/

You can reach Joe at 905-356-3901.

Joe Hueglin wrote:

It is argued here a "Public judicial Inquiry into Toronto G20" remains a necessity so the chain of command resulting in this abuse of power be known. Be known and lead to those with decision making, order giving powers when considering giving the police orders resulting in Canadians being mistreated as recorded in http://underoccupation.com/g20/ know that they will be held publicly responsible and accountable.

From within the Barrie G20 command centre, someone ordered the police on the ground to to let the Black Bloc run wild - and later to harass, attack and unlawfully detain peaceable persons who had come to stand up for good causes like immigration and prison farms.

But who? Blair - or Fantino?

Fri, 2011-01-07 08:24

Maysie

From the wiki link I found that Joe was a Progressive Conservative MP for two years from 1972 to 1974. I would say he is no longer a public figure in the way that I meant in my post above.

Tigana, nowhere in any of those links you provided is Joe's phone number listed. You've crossed over the line here, as posting the phone numbers of private citizens is not okay. If you have a link to the press release, please share it, otherwise I will have to delete the phone number in post #4.

My take from your posts is that you support him, as his interest in the G8/G20 inquiry seems to be aligning with the progressive position on the G20 mass violation of civil rights against the populace. That's great. But you should be aware that his centrist party (that you've linked to before) is not centrist at all but in fact a conservative party. Since babble is a left-wing discussion board, existing within rabble which is a progressive and left-wing media website, you can see where there would be a clash of ideology.

Fri, 2011-01-07 12:38

Tigana

We Are All Alex Hundert

"We Are All Alex Hundert"- available here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tiganatoo/5087233686/in/photostream/

to download and use under Creative Commons Licence

Fri, 2011-01-07 13:19

Tigana

Maysie, I posted Joe's article with his blessing. If you search a little more you will see he has put his phone number in a lot of places on the internet.

To see the miscreants at G20 brought to justice and to bring real reform to the justice and police systems is not a party or partisan matter. It will take all of us working together.

Are you sure that the Progressive Canadians are in a clash with Babble's ideology? The Progressive Canadians are the only official party that opposed the passing of Bill C-36. And the Progressive Canadians support one-tier medical care, Medicare for autism, and free post-secondary education. You can read the PC positions and policies here

http://progressivecanadian.ca/index.php/about-us/pc-policies

and here

http://progressivecanadian.ca/index.php/prosperity-canada

You may find that Tommy Douglas would like them.

Sat, 2011-01-08 03:55

JOE HUEGLIN

"you can see where there would be a clash of ideology."

There are 4 Ps in Politics Philosophy/Principles/Policies/programmes.

My approach is application of the saying "a propensity to preserve, an ability to improve."

Realistic, eclectic, pragmatic - seeking the best approach for the present into the future, there is no "clash of ideology" fore ordained.

.....Joe

Sat, 2011-01-08 05:51

#10

Maysie

Okay, hopefully this is the last of the thread drift.

Welcome to babble, Joe.

Tigana, you've linked now three times to the progressive canadian website. That's enough.

.........

Back on topic: in Toronto this afternoon there's a rally to demand a public inquiry and accountability.

Please continue with the thread topic.

Sat, 2011-01-08 14:36

#11

Tigana

Maysie, Joe has been a member of Babble since June of 2004.
You misinterpreted what you read, and so links and additional information were provided for clarification.

Quote:

To see the miscreants at G20 brought to justice and to bring real reform to the justice and police systems is not a party or partisan matter. It will take all of us working together.

If a fireman had to rescue you from a fire, would you ask for his union card first?

Tue, 2011-01-25 02:29

#12

Tigana

At Year 5 "administrative transparency, oversight and accountability"

"An Act providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight and accountability" was introduced by Canada's New Government as Bill C-2 on April 11, 2006 and was granted royal assent on December 12, 2006.

1. Provisions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Accountability_Act#Provisions

2. History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Accountability_Act#History

3. Amended legislation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Accountability_Act#Amended_Legislation

4. External links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Accountability_Act#External_links

No mention of this Act appears in the accolades being raised concerning the five years in office, and rightly so.

Democracy Watch's analysis in a News Release a little over a month ago, Friday, December 17, 2010, http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsDec1710.html stated,

"Among many other highly questionable activities, the scandals include:

excessive secrecy about Afghan Detainee documents

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsFeb1010.html

the unjustifiable shutting down of Parliament

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdJan1510.html

Cabinet ministers and MPs handing out government cheques with Conservative Party logos on them;

the Helena Guergis / Rahim Jaffer / Patrick Glemaud affair

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsMay0610.html

the West Block contracting affair;

very weak enforcement of key laws by the federal Ethics Commissioner,

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsOct1510.html

Commissioner of Lobbying,

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdSep2010.html

and Public Sector Integrity Commisioner;

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsOct2710.html

interference in Access to Information Act requests;

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdOct1110.html

leak of pre-budget report by Conservative MP's staffer;

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/12/16/kelly-block-leak-aide.html

auditing of MPs' expenses affair,

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdJun2110.html

and senators' expenses;

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/20101216/senate-spending-audit-101216/

and frequent dishonesty by people involved in federal politics.

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdJan0610.html

The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), established by this Act as an Independent Oversight Office to provide independent analysis to the Senate and House of Commons on the state of Canada's finances, the government’s estimates and trends in the national economy, and consequently a proactive rather than a reactive official, though acclaimed as a positive move toward

"administrative transparency, oversight and accountability" continues to be unable to perform the assigned role up to and including the present due to being unable to obtain necessary information -

"Tories resist giving details on internal budget freezes, watchdog says"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-resist-giving-detail...

Quite apart from the demands of the Act lack of transparency and accountability is questioned in a video

G20: Will Police beHeld Accountable?

http://pacificfreepress.com/news/1/7850-g20-will-police-be-held-accounta...

in which the questioned is asked: Toronto G20: Will Police Be Held Accountable After Scathing Ombudsman's Report?

In it the RCMP is quoted as having told the Ombudsman it was unaware of what came to be known as "The Secret Security Regulation", though the Waterloo Regional Police Service were trained as to how the special powers applied.

“Who was the Integrated Security Unit reporting to? . . . Who’s in charge? Are they reporting to the prime minister?

Because that’s ultimately the oversight of the RCMP. Are they reporting to the premier? Because that’s ultimately the oversight of the OPP.The premier and the prime minister, did they agree on a security plan? How did that all work?” asked Mayor Miller of Toronto http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/834287--chain-of-command-questioned-in-g20

"WHO COMMANDED THE G20 COMMANDER? It's time for the Prime Minister to take responsibility for the G20 fiasco" both asks a question and answers it - as an opinion however. Not by what for accountability and transparency is necessary, a judicial inquiry. Transparent in that the inquiry will be public. Accountable through witnesses bound to give testimony under oath.

http://communities.canada.com/shareit/blogs/reality/archive/2010/07/06/who-commanded-the-g20-commander-it-s-time-for-the-prime-minister-to-take-responsibility-for-the-g20-fiasco.aspx

The probabilities at present are low. They will increase. As Year 6 proceeds the results of the police following the orders (and being blamed for the results of the decisions of the unknown Commander) will be coming increasingly before the courts, raising public awareness to the unanswered question of ultimate accountability for the orders given that weekend of June 26-27, 2010.

- Crossposted at http://progressivecanadian.ca/