G8 & G20 meetings

[tenni]

In a few weeks between June 25-27, the G8 will be meeting in a small tourist area Huntsville, ON, Canada. Supposedly, this will be the last meeting of the G8 as it becomes the G20 after the finacial crisis of last year. A few days later, the G8 will join the G20 in Toronto, On, Canada. The costs for security alone is approaching one billion dollars. The G20 is meeting in an area of Toronto that is the financial hub of the country. Thousands are forced to take holidays during the G20 meetings because they will not be able to get to their jobs. The usual plus local protestors will be there or try to be there. Some form of sound machine (Sound Cannons) that may or may not permanently deafen the protestors or anyone in the area may or may not be used should the protestors get out of hand.

Are these meetings beneficial? We lowly ones may not be able to determine the changes that are suppose to be for the good of human societies. A billion dollars just to protect these 20 some odd leaders(other nations will be invited to observe) seems a bit too much for most countries. Arguments of having them meet at the UN where the security already exists have been made.

What are your thoughts on this type of financial meeting of world leaders? Do they do any good?

[darkeyes]

In a few weeks between June 25-27, the G8 will be meeting in a small tourist area Huntsville, ON, Canada. Supposedly, this will be the last meeting of the G8 as it becomes the G20 after the finacial crisis of last year. A few days later, the G8 will join the G20 in Toronto, On, Canada. The costs for security alone is approaching one billion dollars. The G20 is meeting in an area of Toronto that is the financial hub of the country. Thousands are forced to take holidays during the G20 meetings because they will not be able to get to their jobs. The usual plus local protestors will be there or try to be there. Some form of sound machine (Sound Cannons) that may or may not permanently deafen the protestors or anyone in the area may or may not be used should the protestors get out of hand.

Are these meetings beneficial? We lowly ones may not be able to determine the changes that are suppose to be for the good of human societies. A billion dollars just to protect these 20 some odd leaders(other nations will be invited to observe) seems a bit too much for most countries. Arguments of having them meet at the UN where the security already exists have been made.

What are your thoughts on this type of financial meeting of world leaders? Do they do any good?

These meetings are held to protect the rich and powerful nations economies against the rest Tenni.. throw the less well off a few scraps and look as if they are doing something to help is what they do.. I wouldnt spend a penny on security for them but then I have no intention of causing them harm.. just make their lives uncomfy as I face down the riot police with the thousands of others who hate both the G8 and G20 and know the real reason they exist and argue for real change.. and it wouldnt be the first time either.. and hopefully not the last..:bigrin:

[tenni]

I should note that one terrorist act has already happened about a month ago. A bank in Ottawa , Canada's capital, and different city from the meetings was burned and fire bombed. Information was released that it was a pre G20 meeting protest and more would happen at the G20 /G8 meetings.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Blamimg the G8 or G20 for the crowds is stupid. Its not a spectator event. The reason people wont be able to get to work is the protesters. They cause the problems at these meetings.

All for the right of protest. Just don't blame the G20 for it. It's not like they sold tickets to the event.

Pasa

[csreef]

Every time I hear about a meeting like this, I wonder how they are going to pull the strings of the world's economy, and for whose benefit.....

[tenni]

hmm Well, the crowds are not there right now. The crowds of protestors come where ever the meeting is. Actually, I think that there was some form of media announcement from one of the groups at the tall chain link concrete 5 million dollar fence surrounding the security area. Seriously and yes importantly these leaders need a lot of protection. I'm not stating that they don't. As some have said, if Canada took a billion dollars that is being spent on security it could be used for beneficial things for Canadians. Another perspective is if you want to play with the big boys you need to pay the fee. This is apparently the most money spent on security for these meetings. The argument is that there are two meetings and stupidly Harper is having them in two locations because the pretty location can not handle the security issues for 20. I guess that I'm just a wee bit upset at the security expense. Protestors will happen where ever they meet. In a rare moment, I kind of agree with you Pasa....kinda as much as we can...lol


Blamimg the G8 or G20 for the crowds is stupid. Its not a spectator event. The reason people wont be able to get to work is the protesters. They cause the problems at these meetings.

All for the right of protest. Just don't blame the G20 for it. It's not like they sold tickets to the event.

Pasa

[darkeyes]

I take it then, Pasa, that you do not approve of our right to protest.. that we should just stand back and allow those who are making such a bloody awful mess of the world have a nice easy ride.. that we should have our democratic right of protest removed and be pilloried for the scum we so obviously are.. or more likely..worse.. o yea..almost forgot..that for being so fucking cheeky as to disrupt some people's journey to work we deserve whatever comes our way from the riot police.. and to protest the actions of such an august group of people... arent we awful? It is great fun though...scary at times but fun... it was when they met here anyway and I have no doubt whatever it will be fun and at times pretty scary in Canada too..;)

[Pasadenacpl2]

I clearly stated that I am all in favor of one's right to protest. Here, I'll quote myself for you.


All for the right of protest.

I then went on to say that to blame the G8 or the G20 because people protest is stupid. Blame the protesters. They certainly weren't invited. They chose to be there, clogging up the works.

Pasa

[lemonballz]

Dark eyes, protest away. Depending on what your protesting on but feel free. And when hardwood meets bone, then cry to your mom.

I am all in favor of free speech and the right to protest, but having been in that situation before, I see a lot of people who just want to cause violence and problems for others and for the security people. They do not even know what they want but do know they want to show their prowess and testosterone to the world on stage. So good luck and enjoy the ride..haha

[darkeyes]

I clearly stated that I am all in favor of one's right to protest. Here, I'll quote myself for you.



I then went on to say that to blame the G8 or the G20 because people protest is stupid. Blame the protesters. They certainly weren't invited. They chose to be there, clogging up the works.

Pasa

Thats nice, but I'm not convinced you mean it..... protesters are rarely invited.. and clogging up the works? It was protesters who helped your country start its struggle for freedom from mine.. it was protesters who gained women the vote.. it was protesters who won us the freedoms we currently enjoy and protesters who prevented governments from removing many of them.. it is protesters who in their millions helped black people in your country some semblance of equality and dignity, protesters in mine who brought about the end of slavery in Britain and its empire long before it was ended in yours, and who fought and defeated the rise of fascism in this country in the 1930s.. protesters in my country helped bring about the end of capital punishment, gain gay and bisexual people the right to live and love each other, helped gain for women the right to choose... I could go on and on and on.. without it a right sorry bloody mess both our countries and the world would be in.. people like the G8 and G20 would get away with murder.. probably literally..

[darkeyes]

Dark eyes, protest away. Depending on what your protesting on but feel free. And when hardwood meets bone, then cry to your mom.

I am all in favor of free speech and the right to protest, but having been in that situation before, I see a lot of people who just want to cause violence and problems for others and for the security people. They do not even know what they want but do know they want to show their prowess and testosterone to the world on stage. So good luck and enjoy the ride..haha

I always enjoy a good demo and protest hun..but testosterone isnt exactly something I have too much of.. yes there are people who want to cause trouble among protesters.. but experience tells me that at least as much is caused by those who oppose the protest on behalf of the authorities.. and I never cry to my mum.. she brought me up better than that, and who do you think first took me on a protest? AND who is very often alongside me while I am protesting?

[Pasadenacpl2]

What part of this do you not understand? Tenni is the one with the problem. Not me. I don't care that the protesters are there. I'm all for them expressing their right to assemble. I love protests. I've been to more than my share.

My ONLY statement is that it is not the G20's fault for the streets being too choked to get to work. You want to blame someone for it, blame the protesters. THEY'RE the ones in the streets making getting through a hassle. That's it.

Pasa

[darkeyes]

What part of this do you not understand? Tenni is the one with the problem. Not me. I don't care that the protesters are there. I'm all for them expressing their right to assemble. I love protests. I've been to more than my share.

My ONLY statement is that it is not the G20's fault for the streets being too choked to get to work. You want to blame someone for it, blame the protesters. THEY'RE the ones in the streets making getting through a hassle. That's it.

Pasa
What part don't you understand? If the G8 and G20 were worth damn there would be nothing to protest about.. protesters have some responsibility for disruption but were it not for the fact that there was something to protest about then there would be no protest.. therefore some responsibilty yes..blame? Sometimes..not always.. but much of the fault must lie with two organisations which have much to be criticised for, and the authorities of the cities and countries which host their meetings also are substantially at fault.. having seen (and felt) how police and riot squad operate in such circumstances I have no doubt of the truth of what I say.. I have an old school friend who lives in Seattle whose observations of the trouble which the G8 meeting caused there several years ago bear no resemblance to those of the authorities and the American (and for that matter most of the European) media and know from personal experience the truth of the matter when their meeting was held in Scotland....

[tenni]

"Tenni is the one with the problem. Not me."

With the proper inflection, this sounds like a little brother complaining to M...O..O...M about his big brother...lol

My problem is not with the protestors either. (so we all just luv protestors it seems? :)

My problem is with the expense that these meetings are costing and if they actually do any good. Now, I suppose that the argument is if the protestors stayed away would the cost of security be so ever increasing?....or is Harper and his cronies stealing money?..:eek:

[darkeyes]

"Tenni is the one with the problem. Not me."

With the proper inflection, this sounds like a little brother complaining to M...O..O...M about his big brother...lol

My problem is not with the protestors either. (so we all just luv protestors it seems? :)

My problem is with the expense that these meetings are costing and if they actually do any good. Now, I suppose that the argument is if the protestors stayed away would the cost of security be so ever increasing?....or is Harper and his cronies stealing money?..:eek:

Do ne gud? God.. mayb for those countries who make the decisions.. an throw a scrap or 2 2 the less well off.. an thats wy we protest..

..an me don luff all protesters, Tenni.. far from it..can hardly say me is 2 happy wiv the BNP here.. seen the odd fuzz protest an all.. summa the nutty religies.. an even sum who r on protests wich me has been on.. those who r ther 2 cause trubble an b violent an disrupt peaceful protest.. they r in theory on me own side..but ne who stir up violence me don wanna kno.. mite not like 'em..but usually so long as they r peaceful an don preach h8.. then can live wiv it..

[Pasadenacpl2]

"Tenni is the one with the problem. Not me."

With the proper inflection, this sounds like a little brother complaining to M...O..O...M about his big brother...lol

My problem is not with the protestors either. (so we all just luv protestors it seems? :)

My problem is with the expense that these meetings are costing and if they actually do any good. Now, I suppose that the argument is if the protestors stayed away would the cost of security be so ever increasing?....or is Harper and his cronies stealing money?..:eek:

If there was no need for security, then there would be no need for cost to your city/nation. Then again, if your nation hadn't asked to host.

Personally, I'd just tell the heads of state to bring their own security details.

Pasa

[Pasadenacpl2]

What part don't you understand? If the G8 and G20 were worth damn there would be nothing to protest about.. protesters have some responsibility for disruption but were it not for the fact that there was something to protest about then there would be no protest.. therefore some responsibilty yes..blame? Sometimes..not always.. but much of the fault must lie with two organisations which have much to be criticised for, and the authorities of the cities and countries which host their meetings also are substantially at fault.. having seen (and felt) how police and riot squad operate in such circumstances I have no doubt of the truth of what I say.. I have an old school friend who lives in Seattle whose observations of the trouble which the G8 meeting caused there several years ago bear no resemblance to those of the authorities and the American (and for that matter most of the European) media and know from personal experience the truth of the matter when their meeting was held in Scotland....

What a load of dung.

So..let me get this straight. Because you don't like the G8, it's the G8's fault that you are there protesting? They MADE you protest? They FORCED you to be in the street causing problems for the smooth running of businesses not involved?

No, you, and every protester, made a choice to be there. It is a choice of your own free will. And one consequence of that choice is that you stopped commerce and negatively affected the well being of businesses across the city by not allowing customers to interact with them. And the consequence for that is that the police show up.

The protesters at the G8 meetings have negative impact on the city. A negative economic impact. It is ironic, and counter productive.

Pasa

[tenni]

With regard to posts 16 & 17

Pasa
I'm sure that each G20 or at least G8 leader brings some security but these security forces may not interfere with the sovereignty of the host nation. They respect the host nation's sovereignty but I would suspect also demand a certain level of security. This has been a stupid decision on the Canadian government's part to place the meeting smack in the middle of the financial district of Canada.

Protesters follow these leaders where ever they are if it is a democracy. When so many powerful people meet, it is understandable that the voices from democracies who are opposed to how these leaders make financial and other decisions will protest. All that I would ask of them is to do it peacefully. These boundary areas seem to get wider and wider since 1975 when the meetings started but I may be wrong. The numbers of protestors has also probably increased. As a Canuck, I want my government to provide sufficient security for these foreign leaders. I do not want the shame of having any of our guests injured. However, it seems to be way out of hand financially from my perspective. I blame my government for this mess but hopefully all goes well. The protestors protest safely and civily. The leaders meet and make decisions. I've heard that no major announcement is expected until the next meeting.

[darkeyes]

What a load of dung.

So..let me get this straight. Because you don't like the G8, it's the G8's fault that you are there protesting? They MADE you protest? They FORCED you to be in the street causing problems for the smooth running of businesses not involved?

No, you, and every protester, made a choice to be there. It is a choice of your own free will. And one consequence of that choice is that you stopped commerce and negatively affected the well being of businesses across the city by not allowing customers to interact with them. And the consequence for that is that the police show up.

The protesters at the G8 meetings have negative impact on the city. A negative economic impact. It is ironic, and counter productive.

Pasa

Once again you miss the point.. they do not compel me or anyone else to protest..they do and have by their actions or otherwise make me and others feel compelled to protest.. and if the host Government places the meeting in such a place as there will be considerable disruption to business, or people's lives, then that is not the fault of protesters.. simply because of the stupidity of a host Government you don't seriously expect a protest to be cancelled do you? If there is a negative impact on the economy don't blame protesters.. they don't decide where to hold the meetings..

[Pasadenacpl2]

That is the biggest load of crap. They didn't MAKE you feel compelled. You did that. You made a choice. A choice that A: didn't affect the conference or it's outcomes, and B: hurt local businesses most of which are small businesses (the people you supposedly care about).

You were not forced. You were not compelled. Take responsibility for your own actions.

Pasa

[darkeyes]

That is the biggest load of crap. They didn't MAKE you feel compelled. You did that. You made a choice. A choice that A: didn't affect the conference or it's outcomes, and B: hurt local businesses most of which are small businesses (the people you supposedly care about).

You were not forced. You were not compelled. Take responsibility for your own actions.

Pasa

I ALWAYS take responsibility for my actions, Pasa.. dont play with my words.. u know EXACTLY what I mean.. but you actually dont give a bugger for anyone that is hurt just as long as you can blurt out your egocentric dross..

[Pasadenacpl2]

I ALWAYS take responsibility for my actions, Pasa.. dont play with my words.. u know EXACTLY what I mean.. but you actually dont give a bugger for anyone that is hurt just as long as you can blurt out your egocentric dross..

Uh....what? *scratches head*

I care a great deal. Truth matters to me. You made a choice. That choice hurt people, and now you want to blame others for the consequences of that choice.

The G8 did not cause the protests. The protesters did. The responsiblity for any outcomes resulting from the protest are the responsibility of the protesters.

Pasa

[tenni]

"The G8 did not cause the protests. The protesters did. The responsiblity for any outcomes resulting from the protest are the responsibility of the protesters."

Hmm
I wonder if there are not three sentences and three different meanings?

The G8 did not cause the protests.

Well, the protests would not be happening if the G8 did not have financial decisions that the protesters object to. There is a long list of what various groups disagree with. I do have to wonder if some of the groups are just hangers on though. Their connection to what the G8 are responsible for creating may be only secondary or even tirtuary.

The protesters did.
Did what? cause their protest? This does not make a lot of sense. The protesters decided to go to where the G8 are meeting and protest though. Yes. They do make the decision to make statements, shout, scream or silently march. I'm afraid that I tend to blame the protesters or some of them for the damages that may happen. I know that businesses within the district of the meeting and the protests are concerned about any damage that the protesters do. They want financial compensation for any damages. They want the federal government to pay for any damages. No response yet from the Cons Canuck government yet. There would be a slim chance of getting any one specific protest group to pay for any damage. However, if proven with evidence, I'm sure that the police would charge any individual who damages anything. Guilty parties would be jailed and/or fined. It might bring further protests though. That happened in Calgary when the police used what was determined to be excess force against protesters. Gawd forbid that some cop use a tazer. We have had enough of that abuse in Canada. The Sound Cannon and any damage to protesters is another delicate problem. If that is used, the police and government may get into big caca with the public...let alone any lawsuits for permanent hearing loss. Accusations of excessive force by Canadian police or government will create a lot of political actions. Our wacko Con government may permit ot even encourage it but I don't think that the local Toronto police will. The RCMP had better not even try it. They are in a lot of trouble as it is.

The responsiblity for any outcomes resulting from the protest are the responsibility of the protesters."

Hmm If it is a good outcome, I'm sure that they will want to take credit. However if it is a bad result of their protests how much responsibility versus the police's poor planning is debatable. I know that there is an area where the protesters are suppose to be confined. The protesters state that it is impractical to keep them confined to one park far from the meetings. Much money is being spent to do just this. If it fails to contain the protesters, I think that it is a mixed responsibility of the protesters and the government and police.

[mikey3000]

And another pefectly good thread railroaded by petty squabbling and bickering about stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the original question asked.

Tenni, yes I do think that these meetings are beneficial to some extent. BUt what I don't understand is how Canadians cannot see how we are literally be robbed to pay for this exhorbitant price tag. Compare our price tag with other host cities. Not even close. Why?

[Pasadenacpl2]

What is the comparison, Mikey? How much is Canada getting screwed?

Pasa

[darkeyes]

Uh....what? *scratches head*

I care a great deal. Truth matters to me. You made a choice. That choice hurt people, and now you want to blame others for the consequences of that choice.

The G8 did not cause the protests. The protesters did. The responsiblity for any outcomes resulting from the protest are the responsibility of the protesters.

Pasa

Just as governments, companies, and other organisations make or dont make decisions which affect the lives of millions or even just a few, then people have the right to protest those decisions.. last time I looked we still had that democratic right. Whenever a protest is held therefore, the cause of that protest is the decision or non decision of that government, company or other organisation.. therefore the cause of the protest is whichever body made that decision.. or non decision.. people protest, as I have always protested in reaction to the actions (or non actions) of such bodies.. they choose to because they feel they are unable to stand back and allow things to happen (or not to happen) without demonstrating how strongly they feel.. such protests if taken in isolation are usually inneffective, but when a part of a larger campaign, this often.. very often makes a real difference..

I blame no one for my choices except myself and have always accepted the consequences of my decisions, but when other people or other bodies make decisions I feel strongly about yes I do blame them for making me choose between letting them do wtf they like or trying to do something about it..

When it comes to responsibility for the outcome, in 2002 for instance, what responsibility did the millions around the world have who protested against the forthcoming war in Iraq? They were peaceful, actually quite jolly, and your government and mine ran roughshod over them. If violence is caused by protesters then they do have responsibility for that, and where it caused caused by the police do they also bear responsibility for that because they protested? I think not. Disruption to business and peoples lives is often a consequence.. but we are talking about relatively few people and sometimes this will happen.. sometimes, as in 2002 over Iraq, and in other countries around the world when the G8 has met the cause is much more important than the disrupting a few people getting to or from work, shopping, or losing a day or two in till receipts.. protest is about having an effect, otherwise it would be pointless.. sometimes part of that effect is how it affects other people who are not always Pasa, anti the protest, quite the contrary.. in 2002millions of people around the world applauded demonstrators as they marched round the streets of the world.. small business people, workers, shoppers, and in Glasgow.. I even observed two policemen and a policewoman applauding as the protest passed them by..

[Long Duck Dong]

where I would have a issue, is not the right to protest... its the cost to the general public....

while it is fine to say that its ok to disrupt a couple of days shopping or cash in the tills.... owners of business still have to pay the bills, and every day of lost income, has to be made up in other ways.....

in nz, with the sea bed and fore shore protests.... 17 part time workers lost their jobs cos of the protests as the maoris decided that they had the right to march over the main auckland harbour bridge... costing in excess of $100,000 in business in nz's main center.....
businesses had to recoup the lost money, at the cost of the workers.....

yes the maori had the right to protest... but they shrugged off the lost jobs as collateral damage.... strangely enuf, they were quick to kick up a stink over the fact that 8 of the workers laid off, were protestors who took the day off work to protest.....

I am fine with peoples rights to protest.... but they really need to respect the fact that their actions impact heavily on other peoples lives and in some cases, that impact can last a few months for some businesses.....

how is it fair to people not involved in the protest or the issues, that end up losing out cos protestors believe its ok to protest in a manner that disrupts others lives, costs businesses money and use the excuse of collateral damage.....

I happen to know in nz, there has been a number of cases where protestors have screamed foul and blue bloody murder when the results of protests has cost them directly, financially and otherwise
a recent case is with the attack on the waihopai spy center in nz.... 3 protestors causing one million dollars worth of damage..... and the government went after them to recoup the money.....
one of the protestors had a farm owned by a trust, but stated he had no assets..... now the government is going to court to get the farm and sell it....and man you wanna hear the protestors going ape shit.....
yet it was fine for the taz payer of nz, to foot the bill for their actions......

shops have a policy, you break it, you brought it... protestors should be made to pay up for costs incurred by their protest actions.....

[DuckiesDarling]

I'm torn on this because I support the right to protest, reasonable protest. This is not an event that should have anyone out there blocking off streets and adversely affecting the economy of the region. In fact, it should boost the economy to have so many people coming to the region whether they are there for the meeting or to protest the meeting.

What I am against are the people who will set out to disrupt the proceedings for the sheer enjoyment of being disruptive. As long as the protesters take responsibility for what they do, they should be allowed to PEACEFULLY protest while taking into account that shutting down the businesses around there will mean they don't get to eat either.

[darkeyes]

People have the right to protest, peacefully and non violently against anything and anyone they see fit.. that is the democratic way..the way of a free people to try and exact change and improve our world or to save that wich they believe is worth saving. I have been on probably 2000 protests of one kind or another in my life going back to before I can remember.. huge ones involving millions around the world, to demonstrations of hundreds of thousands, or but a few down to a protest of 1.. me. Let me state quite categorically now.. I have never acted violently to any.. I have screamed and screeched in anger and disgust, I have faced down police and argued with them when I have felt them unreasonable, and have remonstrated with my fellow protesters when they have begun to step over the line of peaceful protest.. I have accepted that I may get (and have been) injured and even arrested (which so far I have happily avoided) and like many I have run like a scared rabbit when the riot police have charged and the cavalry barged into a crowd swinging batons.... protests take many different routes and end in very different ways..some do end violently, more often to do with heavy handed tactics by the police than anything else but I do accept that there are those who protest who have no intention of acting peacefully and sometimes do incite the authorities into the violence which I so abhor, and do sometimes even begin such violence.. I have been hurt and beaten by them also for trying to reason with them.. these are risks we take when we try and assert our rights.. we have responsibilities as human beings and I take them very seriously when on any protest.. and am prepared to take and have taken whatever consequences there are for myself..

Many protests will affect people not part of that protest..it has always been and it will always be.. many bystanders observing protests have been beaten and some killled on occasion by police over reaction, and some injured and even killed by stone throwing by "protesters" who are stupid enough to not to care and because of the confusion in any protest which ends violently such things are inevitable.. a violent end to a protest is never inevitable. People cause it and in my experience, more often than not it is the authorities which have been primarily but not exclusively responsible for such a descent into chaos where the lives and safety of people are endangered. Does that mean we should never protest? Should we abandon our protest in the face of what the police may do, and because of a few hotheaded bastards in our own number? No it does not.. the vast majority of protests end peacefully.. there is little if any violence and believe it or not mostly protesters and police chat and get on rematrkably well.. sadly at times this is not always the case..

..and Darling, darling, sometimes we do find that there is nowhere to eat..not often but occasionally it does happen.. however most often, there are plenty places to eat because they remain open and make a right killing as protesters leave a march or a rally and go and get some nosh.. and good for them.. and on a personal note.. on a demo once I nipped away from the march when I spotted a gorgeous black leather skirt and boots in a shop window.. I'm sure they were going to refuse the 200 plus quid I spent before rejoining the march.. aaah Fran vanity vanity..

Most protests are free of violence..but none are free of being important because they are issues about which those who protest feel strongly.. sometimes..there are anti protest protests.. and the two sides face each other and sometimes these also end violently.. but not usually.. I have no objection whatever to people marching at the same time as me, and protesting about me, those with whom I march and the issue about which we march. That also is the right of a free people...

[DuckiesDarling]

Great post, Fran, and follows my thoughts exactly, peaceful protest should always be allowed, activists who incite riots help no cause, not even their own.

[tenni]

The economic impact of the G20 meeting in downtown Toronto continues to escalate. I just remembered this from a few weeks ago. The territory being blocked off not only includes the major financial district but a significant entertainment area. David Mirvisch, the owner of several theatres in Toronto, stated a few weeks ago that he felt compelled to cancel all performances during the G20 time period. He stated that the loss of ticket sales would be 2.3 million dollars. He stated that the government would lose tax revenue not just from the ticket sales but the employee tax as he would be laying off all staff. Businesses are going to suffer from this meeting. There is little being suggested on how to have them recoup their losses.

Yesterday, the US government announced a warning for US citizens not to visit Toronto even though the meeting and protests will be in only this downtown area. That has been deemed a bit draconian. I may not be using the correct term but the warning is not the most severe and is being lifted the day after the meetings end. This will have impact on the economy of all of Toronto and tends to frighten US tourists away for longer than stated...or so the mayor of Toronto stated. He based this on other "warnings" and the economic consequences. Even regional visits will stop to some tourist areas due to what is really a blockade of the area. Oh, the wisdom of government leaders....lol I don't know if other cities where these meetings have happened experienced similar financial losses? Does anyone know?

What we seem to have happening is that meetings that are suppose to be about the global economy and how to prevent further bank crisis is actually causing economic hardship in the city of the meeting.

[Long Duck Dong]

agreed. fran, thats the protestor stance I support....

" we are there to have our voices heard, our opinions felt, but we do it peacefully and we are not disrupting businesses or people "

they are the sort of protesters that I welcome, they are respectful and mindful, do no harm, no damage, and yes often bring extra money to the area for a time....

and agreed, its the activist ( aggressive, in your face, will use force if needed ) protesters that I have issues with.... they are a danger to the other protesters, the general public, and turn any powerful protest into a riot....

I am lousy protester material... while I can be quiet and peaceful, if a cop hit me with a baton without just cause, they would be likely to find it taken off them and wrapped around their heads.....
I am mindful and respectful of laws, and unless I am breaking them, then I would politely thank the cops to not provoke me

that being said.... if I saw a protester picking up rocks to throw at police, the protester would develop a bad case of rocky constipation..... as I respect the police, and they are people too....

yes, during the marchs for the civil union bill, me and the cops had a good old time, they will call up my criminal record, look at me and say, * holy shit * and I would say, " it was not me, I was innocent.... or drunk... " but they knew I was on their side.... I was there to march for nz'ers rights, but also as a peace keeper * unofficially * supporting the police.....

its sad that there is the 1% of protesters that think that rocks and batons and stuff speak louder than words in peaceful protest.....

bit like the gaza flotilla, isn't it..... so many peaceful protestors and 1% that ruined it...

[darkeyes]

To return to the original question, is the largest part of the security budget set aside for such conferences allocated not for genuine protest by citizens or protesters from other countries.. but for more sinister and dangerous threats than any protest will ever be? The cost of policing a protest lasting several days will probably run into quite a few million I accept, because of the numbers of civilian police and logistics involved.. but the cost of the vast military apparatus covering the G8 isnt there for protesters is it? And that is where most of the cost will lie.. whether its a billion dollars worth is another issue altogether..

..when the UK hosted the G8 in 2005 if I remember correctly the cost to the UK was somewhere between 10 and 15 million pounds. If Canada is spending a billion dollars for the next summit I think serious questions have to be asked of its government.. inflation is a pain in the arse.. but its not that bad...

[darkeyes]

its sad that there is the 1% of protesters that think that rocks and batons and stuff speak louder than words in peaceful protest.....

bit like the gaza flotilla, isn't it..... so many peaceful protestors and 1% that ruined it...

Don't u start going all macho on me now ya daft bugger!!:tong:

..and ya don get me that easy vis a vis blame and the convoy...;)

[tenni]

You are quite correct darkeyes. The government is being challenged and the public is not in favour of this expense. The auditor general or another position called the Budget Officer will be examining the costs. The Opposition parties have reported with photos of what they state are "waste" and spending money in a Cabinet minister's riding that seems out of line. One of the eye catchers deals with money being spent on an outdoor toilet that is more than 40 km away from the meeting in Bracebridge for the G8. Now, it is true that this pretty naturally attractive area has long stretches of country where should a leader have to use the facilities they may have to go behind a bush along the highway...lol However, the fractured minority Parliament has both sides trying to blame the other for whatever they can to get votes.

You have hit the economic question correctly. The argument that holding two such meetings in the same(but different) location has caused this expense. Even if you divide them in two, nearly half a billion is far from what was spent on security and other features in 2005. We live in constant predictions of another election and it is stated that the auditor report will probably not be filed until after the next election . Time will tell but it does seem ridiculous in the tough economic times that we still live in.

[Long Duck Dong]

To return to the original question, is the largest part of the security budget set aside for such conferences allocated not for genuine protest by citizens or protesters from other countries.. but for more sinister and dangerous threats than any protest will ever be? The cost of policing a protest lasting several days will probably run into quite a few million I accept, because of the numbers of civilian police and logistics involved.. but the cost of the vast military apparatus covering the G8 isnt there for protesters is it? And that is where most of the cost will lie.. whether its a billion dollars worth is another issue altogether..

..when the UK hosted the G8 in 2005 if I remember correctly the cost to the UK was somewhere between 10 and 15 million pounds. If Canada is spending a billion dollars for the next summit I think serious questions have to be asked of its government.. inflation is a pain in the arse.. but its not that bad...

based around the state of the world, i think that protestors are the least of their worries.... I think they are expecting serious disruption...and that does concern me greatly......

its not what you see, its what you don't and I will beat my last dollar that amongst the protesters are special ops people.... and there will be more * invisible * people than that.....

a big part of protests for things like the g8 summit, is facial records and the building of one mutha of a database on all protesters.... a bit like the england soccer hooligan database, but bigger.....

etc etc etc......

[Pasadenacpl2]

Just as governments, companies, and other organisations make or dont make decisions which affect the lives of millions or even just a few, then people have the right to protest those decisions.. last time I looked we still had that democratic right. Whenever a protest is held therefore, the cause of that protest is the decision or non decision of that government, company or other organisation.. therefore the cause of the protest is whichever body made that decision.. or non decision.. people protest, as I have always protested in reaction to the actions (or non actions) of such bodies.. they choose to because they feel they are unable to stand back and allow things to happen (or not to happen) without demonstrating how strongly they feel.. such protests if taken in isolation are usually inneffective, but when a part of a larger campaign, this often.. very often makes a real difference..

I blame no one for my choices except myself and have always accepted the consequences of my decisions, but when other people or other bodies make decisions I feel strongly about yes I do blame them for making me choose between letting them do wtf they like or trying to do something about it..

When it comes to responsibility for the outcome, in 2002 for instance, what responsibility did the millions around the world have who protested against the forthcoming war in Iraq? They were peaceful, actually quite jolly, and your government and mine ran roughshod over them. If violence is caused by protesters then they do have responsibility for that, and where it caused caused by the police do they also bear responsibility for that because they protested? I think not. Disruption to business and peoples lives is often a consequence.. but we are talking about relatively few people and sometimes this will happen.. sometimes, as in 2002 over Iraq, and in other countries around the world when the G8 has met the cause is much more important than the disrupting a few people getting to or from work, shopping, or losing a day or two in till receipts.. protest is about having an effect, otherwise it would be pointless.. sometimes part of that effect is how it affects other people who are not always Pasa, anti the protest, quite the contrary.. in 2002millions of people around the world applauded demonstrators as they marched round the streets of the world.. small business people, workers, shoppers, and in Glasgow.. I even observed two policemen and a policewoman applauding as the protest passed them by..

And that's fantastic. I thnk you and I are arguing two different things somehow. I'll simplify this.

1. Tenni said he was pissed that the protesters were going to A: cost his nation billions, and B: cause businesses to have to close down.

I said that this is not the fault of the G8 or G20, but rather the fault of the protesters.

I did not say that they shouldn't protest. I did not say that they shouldn't be there. I did not say that they shouldn't protest till their hearts content. I only said that whatever they cause (both good and ill) is directly the fault of the protesters. You cannot blame the G8 for what the protesters do.

So, let's look at what affect (both good and bad) the protesters have had on the G8/G20.

1. Businesses have been shut down for a week at a time in nearly every city it has been hosted at. We can call this a negative impact.
2. Security has become necessary. Canada is having to pay billions. We can call that a negative impact.
3. The G8/G20 has changed it's policies...oh...nvm. No it didn't.

Protest away. It is absolutely your right. You aren't hurting the G8. You are only hurting the people you are trying to help.

Note: I have not addressed the violence or who causes it. It's not relevant and is a red herring.

Pasa

[tenni]

Pasa
You are partially correct.
1/ It is almost a billion at the present time for the security measures. Hopefully it does not go to 2 billion!!!! to make the plural form necessary...:eek: Most G20 countries can not continue to pay such a high security cost for these meetings outside of the US and Britain..well even they can not afford such a cost with their national deficits?

2/ There will be no G8 after this meeting. This will be the only meeting from now on where there is duplicity except I think previously in Washington last year? What were the US costs for security for both a G8 & G20 meetings? I may be wrong but I thought that there were also two meetings there?

3/ In the future security costs will remain high due to 20 leaders being present but hopefully keeping it under even a 100 million is high.

4/ I wonder what the security costs are at the UN when world leaders frequently gather replacing their ambassadors? Now, I don't think that there are more than two or three world leaders there in one day though and that may keep the protesters away and costs down?

5/ Maybe, all G20 meetings should be in one location such as the UN where security is a common criteria. I'm sure New Yorkers would love that (not) and I bet the security area would increase.

Reports today mention the Euro financial crisis may still negatively impact the financial global recovery. The world is not out of the mess of living beyond our means and poor fiscal global plans. Things have gotten economically worse since the first meeting in 1975 is a possible argument. Are these meetings really helping? Maybe the protesters have a point?


And that's fantastic. I thnk you and I are arguing two different things somehow. I'll simplify this.

1. Tenni said he was pissed that the protesters were going to A: cost his nation billions, and B: cause businesses to have to close down.

I said that this is not the fault of the G8 or G20, but rather the fault of the protesters.

I did not say that they shouldn't protest. I did not say that they shouldn't be there. I did not say that they shouldn't protest till their hearts content. I only said that whatever they cause (both good and ill) is directly the fault of the protesters. You cannot blame the G8 for what the protesters do.

So, let's look at what affect (both good and bad) the protesters have had on the G8/G20.

1. Businesses have been shut down for a week at a time in nearly every city it has been hosted at. We can call this a negative impact.
2. Security has become necessary. Canada is having to pay billions. We can call that a negative impact.
3. The G8/G20 has changed it's policies...oh...nvm. No it didn't.

Protest away. It is absolutely your right. You aren't hurting the G8. You are only hurting the people you are trying to help.

Note: I have not addressed the violence or who causes it. It's not relevant and is a red herring.

Pasa

[darkeyes]

And that's fantastic. I thnk you and I are arguing two different things somehow. I'll simplify this.

1. Tenni said he was pissed that the protesters were going to A: cost his nation billions, and B: cause businesses to have to close down.

I said that this is not the fault of the G8 or G20, but rather the fault of the protesters.

I did not say that they shouldn't protest. I did not say that they shouldn't be there. I did not say that they shouldn't protest till their hearts content. I only said that whatever they cause (both good and ill) is directly the fault of the protesters. You cannot blame the G8 for what the protesters do.

So, let's look at what affect (both good and bad) the protesters have had on the G8/G20.

1. Businesses have been shut down for a week at a time in nearly every city it has been hosted at. We can call this a negative impact.
2. Security has become necessary. Canada is having to pay billions. We can call that a negative impact.
3. The G8/G20 has changed it's policies...oh...nvm. No it didn't.

Protest away. It is absolutely your right. You aren't hurting the G8. You are only hurting the people you are trying to help.

Note: I have not addressed the violence or who causes it. It's not relevant and is a red herring.

Pasa

*laffs* No Pasa..we are arguing about the same thing.. but somehow my form of English seems not to translate into your head too well.. maybe I should just write in Franspeak from now on.. ;) I have answered you plainly.. I'm sorry if you can't understand it...

..and without the fear of violence then.. why is it necessary to have thousands of police and massive security.. it is relevant and no red herring.. there may be an argument about just why there is violence if it occurs.. there, like over Gaza and the convoy.. we could have a real doozy..

[mikey3000]

What is the comparison, Mikey? How much is Canada getting screwed?

Pasa

Last year in Pittsburgh, cost was $19,000,000, before that in London, cost was almost $30,000,000

Here in Toronto, the cost has gone over 1.2 Billion dollars.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Yeah. Someone is fleecing someone. Follow the money. If I were an investigative reporter, I'd be following the money trail to find out and exposing that shit.

Pasa

[tenni]

Whether someone has been fleecing the money or misusing or ? should come out when the Auditor General and Budget Officer finish their examination of the costs. That will not start until after the G8/G20 meetings are finished. I heard that it will be sometime in 2011. No investigative reporter would be able to figure out all of this. Eventually, through freedom of information they may find a few interesting gems.

Today, it was reported that there has been an arrest in the firebombers of the Bank in Ottawa about a month ago. It was stated then that this was a pre amble for the G8/G20. Two men in their 50's have been charged. It is unknown if they will be charged with terrorism until a bit further investigation.

A concern is that they discovered 50 calibre and 7.62-millimetre ammunition bullets. Few police forces even have such weapons. This cache was referred to “high-end sniper ammunition” – alluding to the fact that some of the longest-range rifle kills ever recorded in history have been by soldiers using this grade of projectile.

There is a concern that something beyond protesting may happen during the G8/G20 meetings. They did not find the weapons that the bullets would be used with. The men are supposedly connect to a group of a group anti-capitalist arsonists called "Fighting For Freedom Coalition".