Expose the vandals

What about the gangsters, hoodlums and thugs who go by the name "Toronto Police Service"?

Frustrated Mess wrote:

The first link is to the images on a facebook page. They are now all over facebook and ought to be here too.

I agree. I think people are missing the subtlety of the OP.

Somebody save that video before ctv takes it off their website.  There is a lot of evidence on the web,  But who are the right people you want to present it to?   Bill Blair openly says that he doesn't care what Torontonians think. 

We have a face and a video, remind. I'm not saying the face belongs to a provacateur. I am saying the face belongs to a man vandalizing a police car. And for some reason, that I can't figure out, only activists seem interesting in identifying the culprit. I'm just saying is all.

The question is also raised here: http://www.acreativerevolution.ca/node/2474

and here: http://openfile.ca/blog/man-black

Journalist Antonia Zerbisias has been tweeting about him today, too.

Shall we expose the Visigoths next?

I wish I could say the same for this thread. I find it rather disconcerting. I can appreciate the intent to expose provocateurs. even though the thread is not entitled "Expose the Provocateurs" On the other hand I am not comfortable with the idea of turning people over to the cops or having them encounter the criminal justice system. How many do we throw to the cops in the hope of catching a provocateur?

Psst.  This is N.R.KISSED's city too.  He's a Torontonian. And even when we disagree, I recognize he's an ally. I think your hostility towards him is out of line.

That said, I also think the cops should have focused their energy on the window smashers (which is what they were paid a billion dollars to do, among other things) instead of attacking peaceful protesters. I also don't think there's any place for smashing windows and torching police cars.  So if they aren't provocateurs and cops catch the people who did it, I won't cry.  I think they should have been stopped by police as soon as they started pulling that shit.

But there are people who also recognize that the justice system is flawed to the point that they don't want to voluntarily give anyone up to it, even people who do stupid shit like this.  I can respect that point of view.

N.R.KISSED wrote:

I wish I could say the same for this thread. I find it rather disconcerting. I can appreciate the intent to expose provocateurs. even though the thread is not entitled "Expose the Provocateurs" On the other hand I am not comfortable with the idea of turning people over to the cops or having them encounter the criminal justice system. How many do we throw to the cops in the hope of catching a provocateur?

Fully agree. My emphasis all along has been that we must avert and (where we can't) deal with provocations ourselves. It is fatally naive to see the cops as any kind of "allies" in this struggle. I am also extremely skeptical of the kind of "exposé" that says, "the cops didn't do their job". People must clearly learn what the true job of the cops is, and that the agents provocateur work hand-in-hand with that real job, whether they do so wittingly or not.

Quote:

The reason I find this thread uncomfortable is because it feels like vigilantism which is the exact kind of mob mentality that you seem to object to or maybe it is only the destruction of private property that offends you.

Well, there we part ways. "Vigilantism" (though the word has the wrong connotations) is exactly what the movement must do - police itself, organize itself, suppress provocations itself.

Quote:

I think the broader point to be made and has been made by plenty of others is why did the police not respond or intervene at the time.

Not very telling point. The police have pointed to the "brilliant" decoy tactics of the "criminal conspirators", which allegedly threw the police off-guard in the early stages. The broader point to be made is that individual assholes and the police do exactly the same damage, in conscious or unconscious coordination, to our struggle. If we find concrete evidence of collaboration, all the better. But we may not, and we must make our point anyway.

[Mod hat on]

Hey Leninist. You're new here. Don't talk like that to other babblers. This is your first and last warning.

[Mod hat off]

And my original comment way upthread (and I did look at both links) is to question why is a certain kind of violence framed as criminal, and other kinds, like violence done by armed agents of the state, or by capitalists, like NRK is referring to, not thought of as violence that needs to be stopped?

I support catching the asses that committed vandalism and harm to property, but my preference is to hold the police accountable who assaulted protestors, kidnapped people off the street, violated human and civil rights, etc. But that's me.

@ Maysie

On different forms of violence, Agreed. I think the difference is that the case against the police is solid (even the mainstrem acknowledges it), and when cops screw up or are given an unethical job to do it is clear where to direct our anger and action.

With the vandals the case is more grey, because some people see them as allies with objectives ostensibly similar to ours, and some of their tactics have been seen to be helpful. And in terms of responding to it, they don't have an office where we can make a complaint.  It is even more muddy because many of them are anonymous, and there is evidence of the cops masquerading as them.

So I don't think the fact people are focusing more on them means they are disregarding the violence perpetrated by the state.

You do realize that the Black Bloc was the only group at the G8/G20 that kept its word? Not the politicians, police, or "regular" protesters.

Not at this very moment they aren't, but when they show up they are a group, then they disband until the next time they're needed.

Those unwilling to fight the revolution, one busted window at a time... 

Good discussions though, nice to see this sensitive issue being taken up here.  I'm not comfortable with "outing" these supposed vandals in this particular way myself or giving any information directly to the authorities.   Since there's seems to be some question just who this "Black Bloc" really represents though, maybe some pressure could be put on the local law enforcement authorities to give out their information on who they busted for what act of vandalism.  Put it back on them, as I noticed myself that security guards and cops often stood by while a handful of idiots threw stuff at windows, even when only one or two were involved.  Then took down others who just happened by.  Just like in Vancouver.  That could be useful both ways in clearing all the non-violent protestors who were detained and putting the pressure back on them.  If it turns out that any cops are suspected for instigating any of this, or worse, taking part, then *they* should be exposed as betraying their official responsibility towards those who employ them (the public) for petty political purposes asnd made to foot most of the bill.  Heads would roll.

I never suggested turning anyone *over* to the cops, I said I wasn't comfortable with that idea either, but if the bulls let all the actual vandals walk while arresting bystanders then that too could be used against them.  

great, the working class turning on each other. What's the big deal about some broken windows? How many workers were expoited to build those windows and put them there?

Same thing with the cars. Big deal, So what?

Don't fall for the tricks. Stick to the message.. Capitalism is sucking you dry, not some guy burning a cop car or smashing a window.

I think that pragmatically speaking the best bang for the buck will be in going after the laws that were abused by the police rather than the BBers.

We can "use" the BB incidents as examples of police failure to help turn average citizens towards the obvious truth about their police force, but that doesn't mean we have to turn anyone over to the police.

Turning these people over to the police raises concerns for me as well ... I don't trust the police (the city or provincial legislators either for that matter) to be able to act fairly on any information we might give them, and turning your worst allies over to your enemy known for abuse of law and justice doesn't seem to me to be a correct move.

I assure you vandalism is a very big deal to a small business,. It is VERY offensive, and insurance doesn't do much if you have to ante up with several hundred dollars deductable (never mind the losses that are not covered). I don't think you would be asking that question if it were your window, your car or bike, your computer, your guitar or some other valuable thing that got destroyed as a political statement against some world leader.

Okay, but where was this outrage when a whole neighborhood, including small businesses were spectacularly vandalized when a propane station blew up? 

I'm not sure the Black Block views us as allies, and I'm not sure we should see them as allies.  I know little about them, but from what I've seen they seem to be marching very much to their own agenda.  An agenda I'm not sure we know enough about to know if it dovetails sufficiently with ours to call them allies.

But, for all that if you are concerned about the vandalism and other criminal activity spoiling the fair city of Toronto, really, the Black Block guys have to be way, way, way, way, down on your list of priorities.

Now, for those who are trying to find out if the guy pictured is an agent provocatuer, I suggest trying to run his photo against pictures of community college law and security graduating classes, or, if possible, photos of private security firms that specialize in things like strike breaking, but I doubt such data bases are public.  But that's where to look.

Cops and Bikers.  Bike gangs don't usually get their own hands dirty when it comes to day to day criminal activity.  Instead, they have "associate members"  and other wannabe Bikers who do that for them.    I would think the cops employ a similar methodology when it comes to this kind of activity.  

And got no answers.  I think the people who were outraged were limited to the confines of the neighborhood blown up.  

There was never an outpooring of outrage about that event-- on a magnitude many times worse than what happened last weekend-- across Toronto as we've seen said about the BB.  

And, there are yet to be any consequences.

All I'm saying is that if one's concern is really the alleged criminal activity of the so called "Black Block", that's fine.  But get a grip, and put it in context of other crime in the city.   It may be dramatic, but it's hardly very hardly, the worst crime issue Toronto currently faces.

Go arrest the people who work for Perdue Pharma, who are attacking your neighbourhoods and your friends daily and by the hour with Oxycontin.

Okay, true.  But I like to bring that up.

Also.  I'm right about Perdue pharma.

Cytizen H wrote:

The people who engage in the Black Bloc have no interest in joining these groups. Most of these people do tremendous amounts of community organizing the 900 days they're not at large summits.

Exaggerate much? How would any person in the world, let alone you, know so much about "most of these people"??

Quote:

These are people who actually have the courage to live a life counter to the capitalist norm. So, should we keep them from doing the positive work they do? What possible value could that have? So? What Then?

I can't even imagine who you're talking about. No one who has "courage" acts anonymously and smashes windows and burns cars. These are acts of cowards.

Quote:

Are you going to restrain them with acts of violence?

Our demonstrations and occupations and mobilizations must be planned and coordinated in concert by the participating organizations. That means marshalls and other means to enforce our tactical decisions. Anyone who refuses to follow the decisions and acts on their own in a disruptive manner should be warned, warned again, and then restrained, using reasonable force.

Calling the police after the fact and squealing on some individuals seems pretty useless at best, given that the individuals in question are likely to be police agents anyway (see Montebello).

Quote:

Do any of you have a right to use your own value judgements to allow you to value corporate property over human life?

That's just plain sophistry. Is that what you got out of days of debate here? That someone feels sorry for a [b]window[/b] or a [b]cop car[/b]? My "value judgments" tell me that these police agents and/or testosterone-crazed exhibitionist assholes do the following:

1) Alienate ordinary workers, students, minorities, etc. from participating in such protests; and

2) Provide ready-made pretexts for the police to engage in fascist repression - not of the assholes, never ever - but of the vast majority.

People hate this shit. Therefore, we must suppress it. If, as you claim based on unknown evidence, these characters are fine courageous upstanding activists in real life, have a chat with them and explain to them that they have turned into agents of Stephen Harper and McGuinty and Blair and the G20, despite their best intentions. Maybe they'll see the light and stop - if not, they will be stopped.

Caissa wrote:

Is it the job of the Left to help the state in the prosecution of crimes against property?

If someone dressed in black and wearing a mask enters your home and breaks a coffee pot, and you happen to be a member of the Left, then you tell me what you will do.

Same question, but you see this happening at your neighbour's apartment.

If one thousand marchers are proceeding down the street in accordance with an agreed plan, and three masked individuals separate themselves from the march and (say) start beating up pedestrians in front of TV cameras, what will you do?

If the same three individuals don't beat people up but just start snatching purses in front of the cameras, what will you do?

If the same three individuals don't touch passersby, but start overturning carts of street vendors, what will you do?

Answer those, and then I'll tackle your generalization.

But the real issue is this: We must protect our demonstrations (not someone's property) against sabotage, provocation, and disruption - no matter what form that sabotage takes.