For those of you following my posts on concerns surrounding the criminalization of Canadian citizens, you may want to check out the archived news for June 27th : CBC's The National with Peter Manbridge, reports from Rex Murphy and Susan Ormiston [the latter in Toronto for the G-20 Summit]. Susan Ormiston's reports included her describing a "visceral response" to the imagery before her in Toronto: "two or three lines" of riot police, two rows deep, sometimes reinforced by police on horses, and she found herself asking, "What country am I living in?" Susan Ormiston went on to describe how one woman had wept to see the city of her childhood filled with the enormous police presence.
Do you suppose this visual image of a huge police force in Canada was the real reason behind the spending of almost a billion tax dollars?
Rex Murphy suggests that the violence of a small group of 200 or so "losers" he also refers to as "The Black Bloc" [a misnomer because there is no group; it's just a catch-phrase for those who wear black and protest violently] will be a "partial cover" of PM Harper's spending almost one billion to host the two Summits. Has Rex Murphy already forgotten President Sarkozy's remarks of the day before?
When French President Sarkozy was asked about the price tag for the G-8 and G20 Summits in Canada, he side-stepped the question, instead saying he hadn't seen anything "opulent or luxurious". Interesting then, that Sarkozy should make a second statement which appeared to be a criticism of Canada, the host nation, saying that when France hosts the Summits, the cost will be one-tenth what Canada has spent. Why would Sarkozy make those two particular statements?
It would appear President Sarkozy found a nice way of drawing attention to what Harper was actually doing: using the G20 as a staged scene with a message for the Canadian populace.
The film imagery of these last days in Toronto is stunning. The last time I recall such effective propaganda imagery, the director was Leni Riefenstahl, and I imagine that classic piece of film was expensive, too. Riefenstahl's 1935, Triumph of the Will, was made at the request of her leader with a message for the populace. It was wildly successful.
If the spending of one billion on the two Summits wasn't about security [Fadden] and wasn't about luxury for the guest nations [Sarkozy], then it had to be something else. What might that be?
With already 600 protesters arrested and that number expected to rise overnight, Susan Ormiston additionally reported that the previous Quebec and Seattle Summits, where the black-garbed violent protesters also showed up, resulted in fewer arrests than in Toronto 2010. Ormiston also stated the FLQ October Crisis of 1970, [following the kidnapping of James Cross and Pierre Laporte, the latter murdered by his kidnappers], resulted in fewer arrests; in fact, 497 were arrested, but only 62 were charged and held.
Does Rex Murphy actually believe his talk of "heavy penalties" and "banned for life" treatment of protesters is going to have any meaning in the face of what Prime Minister Harper has actually done here? Harper has played fast and loose with our civil liberties and tax dollars, in order to orchestrate a show of the police power at his disposal. And why would he do that?
We're supposed to be pulling out of a war. If we don't, there are going to be protests. I predict Harper is gearing up the propaganda machine in advance of his release of that very news and perhaps news of a financial collapse to boot. Would PM Harper dare to use this country's police force against its own citizens? Harper hasn't said it, but I'm hearing the words, "Just watch me."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
you've got to be kidding me, what an infantile blog post. This is typical of Harperphobics, that guy's got something up his sleeve, I don't know what, and i have no rational facts to back it up but maybe he'll attack his citizens with the police when he decides not to leave afghanistan and they protest.
ReplyDeleteI think the theory behind this incredibly moronic crap is that if you say it enough it will have a ring of truth to it? Just pose it as a question so the implication rests there but you don't need to do the dirty work of finding any genuine evidence "is the author of "canadiantails" harboring a nuclear weapon" he hasn't said so but i'm hearing "bomb them all"
grow up and get some facts
Hello Guest:
ReplyDeleteand thank you for sharing your comment. I'm not saying what IS going to happen? What I am saying is that given the information available I have drawn certain conclusions. I believe it is imperative that Canadians realize the inherent danger in PM Harper's trampling Canadian citizens' rights without the legal authority to do so, and then backing up that unauthorized act with a huge, and hugely expensive, police presence. As long as PM Harper is in office, every citizen not only has the right to question their PM's actions, but should feel an obligation to do so. I would also like to point out that forming an opinion is not synonymous with fomenting revolt: nuclear weapon? bomb them all? grow up?
You have the right to disagree.
I suggest you read my June 29th post, 'Dell on Harper & Watering the Maple' to better grasp the nature of my concerns:
You have the right to disagree.