COMMENTARY · 13th June 2012
Video Attached below of violent Russian Police Forces brutalizing; "cracking down"; on their citizenry.
Those who “Do News” are fully aware of the violence police forces and military regimes commit against their own citizenry. Whether it be the Chinese, the Burmese, the Syrians or the Ugandans, right across the globe, for more than two centuries, news organizations have been publishing about atrocities.
During the early to mid twentieth century, and even into the later decades, the USSR was known as a brutal country. They jailed and beat protestors indiscriminately sending ‘dissidents’ to Siberia and ‘gulags’. The western world acted with indignation with numerous and long standing reports in the western media. News out of the USSR was always disrespected as it was well known, a matter of fact, their news was owned and completely controlled by the Communist government.
Reports which made their way out of the USSR and those other countries they controlled, East Germany etc., were filled with outrageous examples of beatings of the people by their police and military forces.
Today, while local media attempt to portray the recent protests against Russian President Putin as a “crack down” the visual evidence is contradictory.
The broadcast news features hyperbole attempting to exaggerate events in Russia while the video images reveal no examples of abuse. No pepper spray, no batons, no beatings, no crowd corralling yet thousands upon thousands march through the streets.
Watching the news regarding these protests, without the commentators intervening with words attempting to describe what is not happening, reveals an image of a Canadian street in the twentieth century. Police arresting people without beating them. Citizens respecting the police, allowing them selves to be arrested peacefully and no blood on the streets.
This is in stark contrast to the twenty-first century. Today Canadians are regularly beaten, pepper sprayed, jailed without cause and even killed in a manner eerily similar to the USSR and other Soviet Bloc countries of the last century. This while Russians are allowed to freely protest without any observable punishment.
Today, even the local media is critiqued when they dare to cover any abuses by the local enforcement agencies. Soon, with the new majority federal government, these types of reports will be strictly “verbotin”.
Just like East Germany and the USSR of the last century, this century finds our roles reversed. Today local media can still write critically however even the general population finds it distasteful. The line is getting progressively thinner between freedom and fascism. When the majority of the population sides with the abusers, those who use violence as a means to justify an end, the degradation is virtually complete.
Canada has crossed this line a long time ago. The Quebec police force was completely and absolutely exposed for attempting to incite violence which would have been used to justify the beating and bloodshed they were all lined up and ready to inflict.
Next to no action was taken and the population of Canadian citizens has allowed the same to be repeated at the G8 and G20 summits in Toronto. Six Terrace RCMP officers attended the enforcement brigade in Toronto where many officers were seen without name tags beating innocent peaceful protesters. We have repeatedly asked for those officers names, from Councillors and the Inspector of the day, Stubbs. We were told the officers were no where near the violence and protests, yet no one has provide any other details, where they were or their names.
Why is this? Because Canada has become the USSR while Russians act like Canadians.
Officers without riot gear, standing peacefully.
A happy peaceful Canadian or a happy Russian?
Tens of thousands in the streets
Just a thought.
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 14th June 2012
Mr. Peters may wish to reconsider his definition of where rights begin and end. That is, before he discovers the accurate definition in court after his bumper makes contact with another person. Whether the person is engaged in a lawful or unlawful act won't be an excuse.
Nothing to be proud of.
Comment by Apocalypse Now on 13th June 2012
Mr.Peters what do you deliver ,so i am sure to never hire you.
reply to Peters
Comment by Allan Mc on 13th June 2012
Does that same logic apply when going through Banff and there are several bighorn on the highway? Lawful assemblance means that competing interests for the road have to be balanced Mr Peters. You would be better off spending time behind bars for careless use of a motor vehicle and relearning the concept of road safety, sharing the road and keeping the public safe.
Where does it end?
Comment by Mr. Peters on 13th June 2012
If group A has the right to protest and or blockade a road and group B wants to use the same road for lawful purposes, who's rights take precedent?
You see this all the time, a business is blockaded by strikers and yet you have another business trying to make delivery to the first but is not allowed because of the strikers. I crossed a picket line once at 60 miles an hour. I informed the person in control of the picket line that they had the right to strike and I had a right to use the road, 80 thousand pound truck at 60 mph won.
Your rights end at the end of your nose.