From [livejournal.com profile] ancalagon_tb:

This video shows 3 "protesters" at a demonstration suspected of being police agents trying to incite violence. This article from The Star (Toronto) gives some background and follow-up.

In the video, I noticed a police officer with a video camera, although he put it out of sight when he noticed that he was himself on camera.

Also, this blog post on rustyidols points out that the "protesters" were still masked when they were led away by police, as confirmed by photos and the video (around minute 3:30 to 4:00). Furthermore, the police do not admit to having arrested the three men, even though the four other arrests made were acknowledged and the arrestees are accounted for (three released, one still in custody at last report).

The article also states that the uniformed police officers' boots and those worn by the "protesters" had identical yellow triangles on the soles; low-resolution photos exist here, but I don't think of this as significant evidence, as these triangles are standard safety sole markings.

This is, to say the least, disturbing. The police seem to be increasingly defending the status quo, seeing anyone who criticizes it as a threat. In order to nullify that perceived threat, they appear to be willing to undermine the vital political discourse of protest and demonstration and deceive citizens in order to build a case for putting people away.

It wouldn't be the first time the police profile protesters as likely offenders and attempt preemptive measures designed to trigger illegal activity in a "controlled" situation. Because they are an arm of the government, however, they are structurally unable to do this in a politically neutral way. As a result, movements for political change are unjustly suppressed and stifled, and the status quo is preserved beyond its viability. Because real public opinion remains invisible, changes are delayed until they are liable to be explosive, with the attendant disruption and possible violence.

If police currently use undercover provocateurs at political demonstrations and protests, they must stop doing so. The short-term gains they might achieve in maintaining "law and order" are too likely to be greatly outweighed by the resulting long-term loss of respect for the law and the police, and by the violent eruption of voices too long silenced.
Tags:
ext_7447: (Default)

From: [identity profile] iclysdale.livejournal.com


Yes, they're standard safety sole markings.

However -- and I've seen several of the high quality originals close up -- they're also exactly the same sole patterns, the same shape of the boot, and all three are wearing identical boots.

A smoking gun? Not exactly. Awfully suggestive? I'd say so.
ext_7447: (Default)

From: [identity profile] iclysdale.livejournal.com


I just found a version of the images I'd posted in my LJ that zoom in on the sole patterns really quite nicely, so that you can compare the boots really easily. They're the same boots, and I've got no doubt on that. Now, I'll freely admit that all three *could* just be wearing identical recent issue army surplus. *Could*. But I've got no doubts that the boot similarity goes beyond just having the same ANSI markings.

From: [identity profile] ironphoenix.livejournal.com


Good pic; thanks! Yes, that does look, er, highly coincidental, shall we say. Tread pattern seems identical, the yellow mark is in fact an oval, and the "protester"'s boots are disguised with pointless duct tape and yellow paint of some kind.

Military boots, surplus or otherwise, don't have bright yellow spots on the soles. When trying to stay hidden while prone, a nice bright yellow oval is not what one needs.

From: [identity profile] ancalagon-tb.livejournal.com


If only one of them had the same boots - sure could happen. But all three?!? Does anyone have 2 friends with the exact same boots as they do?!?

From: [identity profile] ironphoenix.livejournal.com


Oh, you know those anarchists... if one of them does it, they're all going to be doing exactly the same thing within the week!

From: [identity profile] ironphoenix.livejournal.com


Yeah. I can't actually find any statute which says that they aren't allowed to lie about being peace officers or agents acting under the direction of peace officers, but that is the folklore I've heard.

From: [identity profile] ancalagon-tb.livejournal.com


were those under cover officers allowed to shove (ie assault) the other protesters?

From: [identity profile] ironphoenix.livejournal.com


Yup, that's the SQ for you... thanks for the link!

Yes, they were being goaded into throwing rocks, it's clear from the video footage! NOT!
.

Profile

ironphoenix: Raven flying (Default)
ironphoenix

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags