Royal Bank firebombed in Ottawa - part 4
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/06/18/ottawa-rbc-bombing.html... firebombing arrests made by Ottawa police[/url]
No details - they'll do a press conference tomorrow morning.
Someone has some details, apparently: 3 charged with bombing Ottawa bank
Investigators said the three would be formally charged Saturday when more details would be released about the arrests, the Ottawa Citizen reported.
Why in the hell would you support these people??
Uh, maybe they are innocent?
My sense from Freedom 55's post is not to support them because they're innocent until proven guilty - it's more because they did the bombing for a "worthy cause."
My sense is that I don't have enough information.
That sounds reasonable to me. Everyone should be supported anyway, whenever they come into contact with the legal system.
It would be great if we had round the clock surveliance going on at all these institutions, and committees dedicated to raising funds for all kinds of people who simply do not have the support to make a proper legal defence and end up getting caught up in the plea bargain mill caused by inadequate legal aid funding, racist and anti-poor practices that are inherent in the system itself.
Absolutely Support these people! Stupid not to - no matter what you think.
Supporting people who may have committed a violent act sends the message that such acts are somehow heroic. If you want to do something tangible, ensuring that people who have a history of standing up against oppression get a fair shake from the legal system, quietly arrange to cover their legal bills. But don't go making heroes out of possible bomb-throwers.
As a resident of downtown Toronto, I don't like to see violent tactics being celebrated six days before G-20.
I don't think anyone, here at least, is celebrating violence. It's important that they be supported as people have said. And it's important to support them publically because of how the apparatus of the legal system is designed to isolate and humiliate.
I think this is the perfect case for community based justice. If it turns out that these three did do it (and if so I will be waiting for the backpeddling of all those who absolutely knew it was rich suburban teenagers) I think it is up to their own community of activists to pass judgement, since that is who their actions have affected the most.
Couple of problems with that:
1. Offering public support to people who may have fire-bombed a bank tacitly condones violent tactics, as I previously said.
2. Anybody else find it rather convenient that less than one week before G-20, people with known ties to the activist community are arrested for a month-old firebombing? This works out well for Harper, helping to justify the $1B security price tag. Then after the G-20, they can say, "Oops! Wrong guys!" and turn them loose. That is why the kind of support you need to be offering is substantial legal help rather than just a bunch of well-meaning young people milling about the courthouse saying jaw-droppingly stupid things to the media.
Having your heart in the right place is nice and all, but you gotta use your heads.
I think you're two points contradict eachother. While the second is a possibility the first cannot be true. And, what, you'd take away our right as young people to say jaw-droppingly stupid things???? It's all we;ve got!!!!!
I think this is the perfect case for community based justice. If it turns out that these three did do it (and if so I will be waiting for the backpeddling of all those who absolutely knew it was rich suburban teenagers) I think it is up to their own community of activists to pass judgement, since that is who their actions have affected the most.
A justice system based upon the judgement of victims -- or those who have been "affected the most" -- leads inevitably to the revenge cycles of the Middle Ages. It's a variant of vigilante justice, and has been understood to be so in Western thought about democracy since at least the C17. Put me down as absolutely opposed to such a terrible idea.
That sounds reasonable to me. Everyone should be supported anyway, whenever they come into contact with the legal system.
Oh really, so where were you when Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka or Robert Pickton were arrested? I don't recall activists picketing the court house waving placards saying "we love you Karla"
I think this is the perfect case for community based justice. If it turns out that these three did do it (and if so I will be waiting for the backpeddling of all those who absolutely knew it was rich suburban teenagers) I think it is up to their own community of activists to pass judgement, since that is who their actions have affected the most.
A justice system based upon the judgement of victims -- or those who have been "affected the most" -- leads inevitably to the revenge cycles of the Middle Ages. It's a variant of vigilante justice, and has been understood to be so in Western thought about democracy since at least the C17. Put me down as absolutely opposed to such a terrible idea.
You've taken a huge leap from community based justice to vigilante justice. I was thinking of something along the lines of the restorative justice of the FN and other idnigenous North Americans. I think this makes far more sense than the absurd system we currently have operating. And I think it is by far the msot reasonable in a case such as this.
Supporting people who may have committed a violent act sends the message that such acts are somehow heroic. If you want to do something tangible, ensuring that people who have a history of standing up against oppression get a fair shake from the legal system, quietly arrange to cover their legal bills. But don't go making heroes out of possible bomb-throwers.
As a resident of downtown Toronto, I don't like to see violent tactics being celebrated six days before G-20.
I couldn't agree more. Come out and "support" the people accused of and arrested for fire bombing a bank? Just because they are activists? Sorry anyone who reads between the lines can clearly see the message is that it's somehow a heroic cause and they did something good.
You've taken a huge leap from community based justice to vigilante justice. I was thinking of something along the lines of the restorative justice of the FN and other idnigenous North Americans. I think this makes far more sense than the absurd system we currently have operating. And I think it is by far the msot reasonable in a case such as this.
Funny -- I just knew you were gonna make that segue.
Sorry: I don't appropriate cultures. I think the situation of FN communities is very different from the administration of justice in the broader and diverse agora of the country as a whole, and for the time being, that's a distinction I can live with.
Well, I don't know how you got that from my post. Neither I, nor the call-out, said anything of the sort. I have no idea if they were involved, or not, but that's not the point of the call-out.
[Please forward to friends and allies]
URGENT COURT SUPPORT NEEDED SATURDAY 9:00AM IN OTTAWA
Saturday, June 19th
9:00 a.m.
Courtroom #6, Ottawa Courthouse
Elgin @ Laurier
Ottawa
Three people arrested in relation to Ottawa RBC Firebombing
On the morning of Friday, June 18th, 2010, three people were arrested in connection with the May 18th firebombing of an RBC branch in Ottawa. At least two of the people arrested were picked up by plainclothes officers. The police have been searching their homes. Plainclothes and uniformed officers were seen going inside their homes, and police cars were seen parked outside. It is not known what they are being charged with, although media outlets have indicated they will all be charged with arson related offenses.
Until we are able to confirm further details, we won’t be releasing the names of the 3 arrestees. But the arrested individuals are all well known, dedicated public organizers committed to working for justice on a variety of issues.
Please come out tomorrow morning to show your support for these three arrested individuals. We are concerned that the Crown may ask for highly restrictive bail conditions or attempt to prevent their release entirely.
More updates will follow, as details emerge. Right now, the most tangible way you can support these individuals is to join us at:
9:00am
Saturday, June 19th,
Elgin Courthouse (Elgin & Laurier)
Courtroom #6
For media inquiries, contact: 613-304-8770 or [email protected]
I guess if we were to have a "sentencing circle" and restorative justice in this case - we would have a panel of members of the Board of Directors of the Royal Bank and maybe some employees of the bank branch that was blown up who narrowly escaped being incinerated - all deciding collectively what is the proper punishment for the bombers?
I suspect they would probably get WORSE punishment than they would under the current system and they might be told to spend a lifetime paying back the millions of dollars of damage done by their bomb.
You've taken a huge leap from community based justice to vigilante justice. I was thinking of something along the lines of the restorative justice of the FN and other idnigenous North Americans. I think this makes far more sense than the absurd system we currently have operating. And I think it is by far the msot reasonable in a case such as this.
Funny -- I just knew you were gonna make that segue.
Sorry: I don't appropriate cultures. I think the situation of FN communities is very different from the administration of justice in the broader and diverse agora of the country as a whole, and for the time being, that's a distinction I can live with.
Well you don't have to be a jerk about it. Nor is their any cause for patronizing. I'm not talking about appropriating culture. And I've learned my lesson about getting baited around here, so that'll be end of that.
"Supporting people who may have committed a violent act sends the message that such acts are somehow heroic. "
"That is why the kind of support you need to be offering is substantial legal help rather than just a bunch of well-meaning young people milling about the courthouse saying jaw-droppingly stupid things to the media."
"I don't recall activists picketing the court house waving placards saying 'we love you Karla'"
If you think that's what's involved, then clearly neither of you understand what is meant by courtroom solidarity.
I'm also bemused by the tendency, in this thread and others, to dismiss those we disagree with as "well-meaning young people".
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
Well you don't have to be a jerk about it. Nor is their any cause for patronizing. I'm not talking about appropriating culture. And I've learned my lesson about getting baited around here, so that'll be end of that.
I don't believe I either patronized or baited. I opposed. This is a debate; opposition is what happens sometimes.
As for my being a "jerk" -- heh. Not sure what that would mean. So we'll just let the epithet go, I guess, since it didn't make much of a comprehensible impression.
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
Oh. Ok: I'll wait for the mods.
ETA: I'm a gril.
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
For someone who hates cops as much as you do, you show a remarkable inability to resolve disputes without involving authority figures.
And, what, you'd take away our right as young people to say jaw-droppingly stupid things???? It's all we've got!!!!!
To be fair, me saying "Kids - don't say stupid things to the media," is kinda like Keith Richards saying, "Kids - don't do drugs."
Here comes a mod...
Ok, I say this with some trepedation as skdadl is, as we speak, only meters from my front door. I don't believe there was an intention to bait, but I can see where it could come across that way.
Ideally, there was a door open for discussion on different approaches to justice which IMV BTW are not mutually exclusive. I think the restorative justice model as practiced within FN communities has much wisdom which can be applied, (not necessarily appropriated) to our western model. Indeed, some of the principles of rehabilitation already exisit within the western model, but they tend to get lost within our more punative impulses.
I do take skdadl's point about the pitfalls of a victim driven justice model. The western model actually started moving away from that much before C17, with the principles of the state being responsible for dispensing justice going back to the Shire Moots and Hundred Moots as early as C7. Flawed as it was, a lot of this was lost in the practices of the middle ages. (F**king Normans)
Actually, a model of restorative justice which FN communities would readily recognise exists today in the young offenders legislation, but I'm really starting to digress.
Anyway,, there's lots of room for polite and collegial debate here, so let's play nice.
[quote=Sineed]
[quote=E.Tamaran]
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
[/quote]
For someone who hates cops as much as you do, you show a remarkable inability to resolve disputes without involving authority figures.
[/quote]
Sineed,.....don't
And, what, you'd take away our right as young people to say jaw-droppingly stupid things???? It's all we've got!!!!!
To be fair, me saying "Kids - don't say stupid things to the media," is kinda like Keith Richards saying, "Kids - don't do drugs."
Hahaha. Awesome.
And as for the other thing, Skdadl, didn't mean to call you a jerk, just tactics felt "jerky". If I had felt mod intervention was necessary I would have flagged the comment, but E.Tamaran, I certainly appreciate the back up! And Old Goat, your wisdom and knowledge are far beyond mine. Thank you for your comments. I have much to learn.
@Sparkyone.... Now THAT"S baiting!
At the risk of using gender demeaning terminology, Sparky stop being such a dink. These stupid games of caught-you-in-a-contradiction add nothing, are needlessly provoking, and you're not even very good at it.
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
For someone who hates cops as much as you do, you show a remarkable inability to resolve disputes without involving authority figures.
I found it weird that he's asking for input from mods who 'have it out for FN posters'.
CitizenH, it was a valid point. We're you out supporting Karla when she went through the justice system?
Or is this different because it falls under your targeted destruction for a good cause umbrella?
No question the timing of these charges is no accident. Because the monsters are meeting those charged should be supported in large numbers by all kinds of people, enough to put the fear of god and more fires into the evil rich ruling class. I predict that one day in the not so distant future, when we apprehend the role of such banks in systematic global brigandage, social sabotage and class war, such fires will warm the cockles of our now hardened hearts for such incendieries. Then it will be ' burn baby burn'and the more the merrier. This is only one re-action and nobody says a mass movement isn't necessary to develop and coordinate strategies and tactics - but perhaps in some small way this fire was lit to illuminate a certain kind of presently existing dangerous darkness that exists in kkkanada today. The boot is going to come down hard no matter how well behaved our protests - soon in any case. They daily erect more fences, build more prisons, less schools or hospitals. There is a class war being waged against many of us, and Indigenous, and the land we live on and the surest way to lose such a war is not even to know you're in one. Prepare. Organize. Connect the dots. This was a symbolic action. Think on all it symbolizes. Begin to move and plan. Don't support state power repression or persecution masquerading as prosecution. Down with G8/G20 and all such monsters.
@Sparkyone.... Now THAT"S baiting!
At the risk of using gender demeaning terminology, Sparky stop being such a dink. These stupid games of caught-you-in-a-contradiction add nothing, are needlessly provoking, and you're not even very good at it.
I don't think i have ever been called a dink before Oldgoat but okay!
If you are refering to my comment about ET then I feel they are justified. On one hand he will accuse the mods of treating FN unfairly and basically having it out for them. On the other hand he'll turn around and look to the same mods for support. If they don't support him then they once again have it out for the FN.
The stupid games of caught you in a contradiction are common place on babble. It's one of the first things I notcied when I came here. (Thank you for pointing out I suck at it) You're right though they don't add anything and it's immature.
I think this is the perfect case for community based justice. If it turns out that these three did do it (and if so I will be waiting for the backpeddling of all those who absolutely knew it was rich suburban teenagers) I think it is up to their own community of activists to pass judgement, since that is who their actions have affected the most.
A justice system based upon the judgement of victims -- or those who have been "affected the most" -- leads inevitably to the revenge cycles of the Middle Ages. It's a variant of vigilante justice, and has been understood to be so in Western thought about democracy since at least the C17. Put me down as absolutely opposed to such a terrible idea.
Yeah, me too, but I'm just trying to catch up with all the nonsensical things being said here. This just happens to be one of the worst.
My take:
The call for "support" contains no explanation, no analysis, no hint as to what is being supported.
I see two possibilities:
1. If the authorities have been harassing Ottawa-area activists under the pretext of the bank burning, and have just picked up three known activists for the sake of show, then all progressive people should be out in the streets condemning this persecution.
2. If there is evidence that these people torched a bank, and there is no such persecution apparent as mentioned in item #1, no one should demonstrate in support of anything. Let the flawed justice system take its course. If it appears there is a frame-up, or miscarriage of justice, we should of course condemn it as we do in all cases. And, we should continue, as progressives, to condemn these destructive and regressive tactics which are destined to ruin any real movement. If we give the slightest indication of support for such criminal behaviour (under some such euphemism as "diversity of tactics"), we will not just earn, but deserve, the mockery and disdain of Canadians of all walks of life.
Good points Unionist
oldgoat, that's ok, although I hope you won't mind if I observe that that is a lot of projection I can't really identify with. If there's one thing I am not, in theory or in life, it's "punitive," and my notion of a just justice system is not punitive either (although it's probably kind of idealistic, and of course never realized anywhere).
And just remember: I can see you from my kitchen. ;)
I don't agree with the whole "we must condemn" line of reasoning. If you are really opposed to it it's probably be best to ignore or dismiss it. The more people talk about the firebombing the more successfull it was. The point of an action like that is, quite obviously, to bring attention to issues. If you're talking about it it's working. No matter what you're saying about it. These people, if it was these people, weren't trying to bring attention to themselves, nor were they trying to be heroes. Nor was this a cathartic act.
[quote=skdadl]
oldgoat, that's ok, although I hope you won't mind if I observe that that is a lot of projection I can't really identify with. If there's one thing I am not, in theory or in life, it's "punitive," and my notion of a just justice system is not punitive either (although it's probably kind of idealistic, and of course never realized anywhere).
And just remember: I can see you from my kitchen. ;)
[/quote]
*closes housecoat*
I certainly wasn't referring to you in that skdadl. By that point in my second paragraph I was talking purely abstractly.
Say, Ya wanna pop up for a glass of cheap chablis and sit and watch me garden?? I'm just going out to stick the last few things into the ground.
The more people talk about the firebombing the more successfull it was. The point of an action like that is, quite obviously, to bring attention to issues. If you're talking about it it's working.
To the extent that people are talking about it - I'm not hearing ANYONE talk about any of the issues that the bombers were supposedly wanting to publicize. All I'm hearing is a lot of talk about how "terrorism has come to Canada" and how "the people that did this must be lunatics". If you see any way whatsoever that people talking about those things advances a progressive agenda by one iota - please explain.
That sounds reasonable to me. Everyone should be supported anyway, whenever they come into contact with the legal system.
Oh really, so where were you when Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka or Robert Pickton were arrested? I don't recall activists picketing the court house waving placards saying "we love you Karla"
None of these people were under-represented. My point is there are literally thousands of cases that are being dealt with right now in the justice system, which are being resolved against the defendant because there is no proper support for the defendant. If I felt that Picton, Bernando and Homolka were not being given proper access to legal councel, or being shafted in the plea bargain process to admit to things they did not do, I would glady support Pickton, and Homolka and Bernardo in their right to a fair trial.
But I guess for the numbskullled an arrest is a good as a conviction.
Democracy is not just about sticking an orange sign in your front lawn every four years Stocky. It is also about fair adminstrative process.
If you have evidence that these people are actually being "shafted" and/or if you have evidence that they are innocent and are being framed then let's hear. I'll express support when there is evidence that support is being denied in the first place. But you're going to half to walk an extremely fine line between "supporting" these people in terms of making sure they get proper legal representation and being seen as expressing support for the terrorism they have been accused of.
Skadld was clearly baiting with his/her "I don;t appropriate cultures" remark. It was definitely aimed at Cytizen H, as if to say that HE is one who appropriates cultures. Mods? What you you think?
For someone who hates cops as much as you do, you show a remarkable inability to resolve disputes without involving authority figures.
When's the last time a mod on Rabble shot a 7-year-old to death, or watched an FN in jail vomit 23 times over a 12-hour period until he died? Pigs did that. Mods aren't pigs. You're a ********* person who doesn't ***** with **** until he/she *****.
How can a pig shoot anyone. Ive been in a few farms in my life and pigs don't strike me as having the manual dexterity to even hold a gun, let alone fire one.
If you have evidence that these people are actually being "shafted" and/or if you have evidence that they are innocent and are being framed then let's hear. I'll express support when there is evidence that support is being denied in the first place. But you're going to half to walk an extremely fine line between "supporting" these people in terms of making sure they get proper legal representation and being seen as expressing support for the terrorism they have been accused of.
The evidence that poor people are shafted by the legal system in Canada is everywhere Stockholm. In fact there are whole reports written by legal scholars evidencing the systemic prejudice in the system. The only people who are not are those that are supported; rich people, those with connection; those in high profile cases where its important for the crown to keep up the appearance of fair play. Likely as not, were these people not supported, they woule be shafted too. The fact that they have a network of political allies, is part in parcel of making sure that they recieve due process and a fair trial, unlike so many others who slip beneath the public eye, thanks to guilty until proven innocent ideologues like you.
Systemically, the legal system favours the rich over the poor. In the depressing event that someone will here will not be able to accept that statement at least in principle, I suppose I could elaborate, or maybe it could even be its own thread. I would suggest that an exeption to this is in the event of cases which are particularly high profile, and where there is a good deal of public scrutiny, or at least attention. I'd say in such cases defendants recieve competent defence.
I just want to say about my opening sentence that there is a certain element of luck of the draw here. I've personally seen cases where very poor and marginalised people have been assigned excellent lawyers through legal aid, but I'd say it's generally pretty inconsistant and getting worse as such protective measures we do have become eroded.
As far as this case goes, and the callout in post 3, I'll give it a pass until it becomes evident that there is some problem with process.
From what I've read so far about the people arrested - they don't sound particularly poor. One is an "engineer and electronics enthusiast" and another is a "retired federal civil servant". For all we know they are proud of what they did and all plan to plead guilty. I think unless you are some "agent provocateur" who wanst to make the left look bad - I would keep far far far far away from supporting people who firebomb buildings.
Again, if you know these people and have reaosn to believe that they are 100% innocent and that they condemn the bombing as much as anyone - then fine go ahead and start a legal defense fund.
To the extent that people are talking about it - I'm not hearing ANYONE talk about any of the issues that the bombers were supposedly wanting to publicize. All I'm hearing is a lot of talk about how "terrorism has come to Canada" and how "the people that did this must be lunatics". If you see any way whatsoever that people talking about those things advances a progressive agenda by one iota - please explain.
From the article posted at the top of this thread:
Ottawa claimed RBC was targeted for its sponsorship of the 2010 Olympics.
Obviously the article goes into absolutely no depth about the issues around this, but it is not saying "terrorists bomb bank for no reason". The article calls them activists, and mentions part of why they targeted RBC. For most people who give a shit about the world (and I'm by no means suggesting that you don't) this should raise questions about a)RBC's legitimacy as a target and b)reasons why the Olympics should be targeted for protest. Intelligent people, when they have questions, look for answers. So, yes, their messag is still in the public eye.
What's more likely to happen is that it will create a backlash against all anti-corporate protesters and any debate about sponsoring events like the Olympics will be shut down and compared to the "Ottawa bombers". These attacks accomplish NOTHING except to play into the hands of Harper and the police.