Riot Police on Mcgill campus

thomas.berubeg

Wandering the World
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
9,083
Location
Ft. Lauderdale
So, last Thursday a peaceful demonstration by Students was violently broken up by Riot Police. This demonstration was coming on the tails of a 30,000 people march down sherbrook street to protest Tuition Increase throughout Quebec. A group of Students peacefully occupied the administration building, and were assaulted by security forces. Other students gathered in solidarity in the open area in front of James Administration building, forming a human chain. In response, the Police were called by Mcgill, and, first, Police on Bicycles showed up and used thier bikes to force thier way through the crowd. In response to the resistance of the Students (Still non violent) Riot police showed up and began beating and teargassing students. (note: I was not there, but I have a number of friends who were. I was at home, having left after the march.)

http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2011/11/students-occupying-james-administration-assaulted-by-security/

Fourteen students claim to have been assaulted by McGill Security while they occupied the fifth floor of the James Administration building for two hours last Thursday afternoon.

The occupation coincided with a 30,000 person-strong demonstration against tuition hikes, which ended at McGill College and Sherbrooke.

The students occupied several rooms on the floor, including Principal Heather Munroe-Blum’s office, before negotiating an end to the occupation with Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Morton Mendelson and Provost Anthony Masi. The protestors have been granted immunity.

“Each person occupied for their own reasons, even though those reasons intersected, I think,” said one of the students. All students involved in the occupation spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The Occupation

According to an interview with three of the occupiers, the students entered the building around 3:45 p.m. and encountered no security. Once they reached the fifth floor, four of the students occupied Munroe-Blum’s office, while three other students controlled the door to the main hallway and two students controlled the door to the stairs. The remainder of the students occupied the reception area on the floor.

Office staff videotaped the demonstration. “We informed them this was a peaceful occupation,” said one of the occupiers.

At a demonstration outside James Administration on Friday morning, Susan Aberman, chief of staff for the office of the principal – who was working in the office Thursday afternoon – told students and staff that she was threatened by occupiers the day before.

“I was in my office when people with hoods and masks broke their way into my office, they pushed their way through locked doors, they pushed my colleague, and they pushed me and they came into my office and they threatened me,” she said.

Upon entering the office, the students dropped a banner, reading “10 Nov – Occupons McGill,” from one of the fifth floor windows.

Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Morton Mendelson was alerted to the situation and arrived on the fifth floor, where he said events were “already in progress.” According to Mendelson, the students barged into the offices, some wearing masks and hoods.

Occupiers have said that some of them wore bandanas covering their faces, but that none of them wore masks.

“Security was called by the people in the office, who were quite disturbed by their presence,” said Mendelson in an interview Friday afternoon with reporters from The Daily, the McGill Tribune and Le Délit.

According to the occupying students, a security guard tossed an occupier to the ground and dragged him by the legs into the reception area. The student had been sitting in Munroe-Blum’s office chair.

“At some point during that altercation he was hit in the stomach, either by a leg or by an elbow, and he was injured,” said one occupier.

According to another of the occupiers, the student who was hit in the stomach “went into mild shock for a while and was winded. Luckily, there was a person who knew first aid.”

One occupier, who spoke to The Daily, said he has osteoporosis. The occupier said he was seized from behind by one security guard, and pushed and dragged by several security guards into the main reception area.

“I was dropped on the floor and he kept jumping on me,” he said, “and literally [they] like threw me out.”

“A single punch could probably break my rib cage,” said the student. “In the end I didn’t get much, I think I just got a little bruised on my right side, near the ribs.”

The student told McGill Security “very, very clearly” that he had osteoporosis. “They completely disregarded it and threw him out of the room,” said a witness.

Mendelson said that Security was “concerned about the safety of the situation.”

“You don’t think it’s confrontational to storm into an office, to swing open a door, walk by people, have a mask on – you don’t think that’s confrontational?” he asked, in response to a question from the Tribune as to whether he thought Security had exercised their mandated amount of force.

According to Mendelson, the University has the right to ask students to leave when they are “in an inappropriate place.” According to several of the occupiers, the 14 students were not made aware of any rules or laws that they could have been violating.

“I’m 99 per cent sure that did not happen, and definitely no one read to me from the student handbook,” said one of the students.

According to Mendelson, “when a student was asked to leave and didn’t, the student was in violation of the Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures.”

Negotiations

The students said they were in the main reception area for approximately 45 minutes, during which Masi and Mendelson came in to speak with them. Mendelson said he was the first to speak with the students, before Masi arrived on the fifth floor.

“They wanted to tell me what their position was on tuition. I reminded them what the University’s position is on tuition. They weren’t willing to listen to me. I have heard their position before. It’s clear that there wasn’t going to be a settling of that issue,” Mendelson said.

He said that, when Masi arrived, they asked the occupiers what they wanted.

“We thought maybe they’d want to have a conversation, whatever, and at that point they said they wanted to leave, and we said, ‘Fine, we’ll take you out.’ And then they said they wanted to have some assurances,” said Mendelson.

According to both the students and Mendelson, the students asked to be allowed to leave without any arrests, charges, disciplinary action, or names taken. The occupiers also said they refused to leave unless students who had forced their way in to occupy the second floor of the building were allowed to leave under the same conditions.

According to the students, Masi originally stated that they wouldn’t be allowed to leave without non-academic probations or charges. However, Mendelson claimed that Masi never made such a statement.

According to Mendelson, talks between the two parties concluded in less than five minutes, after Masi and Mendelson had consulted with each other and the Montreal police, and subsequently accepted the students’ terms. The students on the second floor negotiated with a member of McGill Security and a Montreal police officer. One student occupying the second floor said later that the sit-in was non-violent.

The police assisted Mendelson and Masi in negotiations with the students, though the officers never had any direct interaction with the students.

“They’ve had experience in this sort of thing,” said Mendelson. “We needed some advice about security in the building, because the building was surrounded… People were very disturbed. They offered some advice about what we should have people do.”

Mendelson added that, “What happened inside [actually] unfolded reasonably well.”

The students disagreed. One said on Thursday night that, “The only violence that we experienced was at the hands of McGill Security.”

Mendelson said he would not be obtaining the McGill Security report on the incident, as Security reports to Associate Vice-Principal (University Services) Jim Nicell.

“Obviously, we don’t know everything,” Mendelson said.

— with files from Queen Arsem-O’Malley and Erin Hudson

Today, in response to the presence of Police on Campus on Thursday, We held a Rally, which seemed rather successful in terms of consolidating the student body.

http://www.cjad.com/CJADLocalNews/entry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10313084

A few hundred protesters are demonstrating outside McGill University's James Administration building. They're upset with the university for calling in riot police last week after the big student strike.

Some McGill students and a professor say they were beaten with batons and pepper sprayed after Thursday's big tuition hike protest ended.

They say it happened after students told the administration they were going to peacefully occupy a floor in the James Administration Building.

Today's demonstration was held in a square in front of the administration building that students voted to rechristen "Community Square." They applauded and chanted slogans such as, "Whose university? Our university" and "So-so-so, solidarity", cheering on speakers such as Lilian Radovac, a course lecturer in Art History and Communication Studies who took part in last week's student occupation.

"There've been a number of moves that have been made over the last several years to limit people's freedom of expression on campus, to limit their ability to engage in legal forms of labour protest and to limit students access to campus space," Radovac told reporters.

"I think it's just reached a boiling point. I think people are upset. They know they have less and less say over their campus and therefore their community."

On Friday, about 100 students and faculty held another demonstration in front of the administration building, demanding answers. The university has said it will conduct an internal inquiry into the matter.

This is only the last in a long string of events by the Mcgill Administration in the past few years taking power away from it's workers and it's students. Munaca (The Union to which almost all Mcgill Workers belong) has been on strike for nearly 3 months, now, as Mcgill refuses to raise their salaries, which are currently MUCH lower than the provincial average. The Administration has used it's influence within the government to pass injunction after injunction against Munaca's picket lines, pushing them further and further away from Campus (I believe members of Munaca are not allowed within 50 meters of campus, now.)
 
What was all that stuff about Canada being a liberal wonderland/hellhole again?
 
What the? This is something not to be expected in Canada!
 
I would love to see an "Occupy Parliament" protest.
 
I love how you describe the students forcible occupying an admin building, forcibly restricting the movement of police, and then still call them non violent.
 
Since when does just standing in a certain space, even if it's blocking other people, qualify as violence?
 
Is this how kids think now of days? That as long as they are being "non violent" (which I believe they weren't), they can commit a crap load of crimes, infringe on others people right and property, and shouldn't have the cops get called on them? It's selfish.

I'm a big believer in civil disobedience, it's a very patriotic American act in someways. I'll just quote this guy as he says it better then I could.
I have an arrest record for civil disobedience that spans 23 years and covers seven states, the District of Columbia, and one foreign country. However, I never go to a demonstration to get arrested; I go to demonstrations to bring about change, and am willing to risk arrest to produce that desired change.

Any group that wishes to use civil disobedience or direct action to achieve change must:

1) make absolutely clear what change is desired, usually by listing specific demands;

2) target a group or individual with the power to bring about the desired change;

3) design actions so that the cost of resisting change is perceived by the person/group in power to be greater than the cost of giving in.

The classic type of civil disobedience advocated by Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr., is one in which an unjust law is deliberately and openly violated. Most of the demands of AIDS activists do not lend themselves to the classic Gandhi/King style of civil disobedience. Nevertheless, the same basic principles apply: Make it more costly for those in power to resist than to give in.

This is done in one of two ways:

1) create problems for those in power that will not go away until they give in (for example, occupy their offices or zap their phone lines), and/or

2) educate the public in ways that both cause embarrassment to those in power and cause them to be fearful that the popular movement for change may grow strong enough to threaten their power (for example, interrupt news broadcasts or hang banners).

We should be thinking and talking about what we do much more carefully. For example, when we sat down and blockaded the entrance to the New York State Senate last year in Albany, we were very clear about what we were doing. We did not say we were there to get arrested. We said we had a set of demands and that if Ralph Marino (the Senate Majority Leader) and Governor Cuomo would agree to our demands, we would go home because we were there to pursue a specific set of demands, those demands were picked up and publicized by the media covering the arrests. That helped to educate people, embarrassed Cuomo and Marino, and contributed to the building of our movement and the achievement of change. Other ACT UP members who were in Albany that same day apparently told a local newspaper reporter that they were "going to get arrested. "That reporter then wrote a column that described people who were intent on getting arrested, as if getting arrested were an end in itself. There was no mention in this column of the specific issues that drove people to commit civil disobedience.

If these individuals had 'instead told the reporter that they were willing to risk arrest in order to bring about X, Y and Z, the action might have been more powerful. My point is simply this: When we engage in civil disobedience, we do so to achieve change, not to get arrested.
Getting arrested is of little significance in and of itself. We're not out to accumulate arrests like merit badges. Arrests result from our commitment to achieve change; they are the means to an end, not the end in themselves.

Aldyn Mckean (d. 1994)
http://www.actupny.org/documents/whywe get.html

They didn't follow several rules to a good civil disobedience rally. This was just an unorganized mob that broke off from the main protest. This wasn't pre-planed, and there was no specific demands or message. This was a mob of kids wearing bandanas over there face, forcibly breaking there way in to buildings and offices (peacefully?), and just breaking a lot of laws.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_Sit-Down_Strike Even as extreme as these sit-in were, they were organized and were able to give out a clear messages to the media to gear up support for them. They had people working the courts and the public.

And whats the message at the end of the day? The high cost of tuition? Nope, its kids crying about having the cops called on them. These kids who broke in and occupied the builds didn't really care about what was going on, they just saw a good time and excuses to do something dumb. And because of there selfishness to not face the consequences of there actions, what ever important issue has been casted aside.

Mohandas Gandhi pleaded guilty and told the court, "I am here to . . . submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can be inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen."
 
Since when does just standing in a certain space, even if it's blocking other people, qualify as violence?

Using your body as a physical obstruction while refusing to move is the most basic form of violence there is.
 
Is Canada ripe for revolution?
 
Using your body as a physical obstruction while refusing to move is the most basic form of violence there is.
:lol:


...no it isn't.
 
:lol:


...no it isn't.

No it's not.

So I can be violent while passed out? :sleep:

Read it and weep:

Violence is the use of physical force to apply a state to others contrary to their wishes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence

Physically using your body to deny access to an area others wish to use is violence, however mild.
Guess what the military's use of force continuum is?

1.) Presense
2.) Verbal Commands
3.) Soft Controls

4.) Hard Controls
5.) Intermediate Weapons
6.) Deadly Force.

The OWSs are definetly using one and two, and I bet a good portion are using three. All those resisting arrest are guilty using four. We have evidence of many using five.

We only have evidence of one using six as a means of protest (pushing the cop in front of the a bus). Though a few have used six for tangental reasons while at the OWS sites.
 
I would love to see an "Occupy Parliament" protest.

There was an occupy movement in Nova Scotia down Halifax way. I dont know much about it though other than a bunch of old people are writing letters to the editor complaining.
 
Using your body as a physical obstruction while refusing to move is the most basic form of violence there is.
So the Tienanmen Square demonstrations were a violent insurgency? :rolleyes:

TankMan2.jpg
 
And standing in the doorway isn't really a physical obstruction for somebody with five feet of run-up, so I would argue that my point stands.

That's a poor argument for an otherwise reasonable point.

In any case, these students were really occupying the wrong buildings anyway. The tuition hike comes as a direct result of a shift in provincial policy. Across the country, provincial funding provides a little less than half of all University income. The Province of Quebec, in its 2011-2012 budget explicitly stated a plan to have student tuition income increase.

From the 2011-2012 Education Budget:

...

Tuition fees will be raised in a gradual and managed manner.
— The student contribution, which represented 12.7% of total university
revenue in 2008-2009, will be raised gradually to 16.9% in 2016-2017.
⎯ Universities will be asked to encourage more donations from individuals and
businesses through Placements Universités, a new lever introduced by the
government for this purpose.
⎯ In addition, universities will have to launch new initiatives to boost their other
revenue sources, i.e. research revenue, revenue from certain continuing
education services and revenue from ancillary services.

(bolded by me)

I didn't delve further into it, but I'd imagine this comes as a result of a shift in Federal policy on transfer payments.

Were I McGill student, I might be protesting the tuition hikes too. However, this kind of action, occupying the offices, is hardly constructive. If anything, it just draws attention away from the root political issues behind the tuition increase. Also, when a guy with osteoporosis who says that a single punch could break his ribs only ends up with a minor bruise after supposedly being jumped upon and forcibly thrown through the air, I tend not to believe him.

I don't mean to rag on you 'fish, but it's really the same thing: a poor argument for an otherwise reasonable point.
 
Back
Top Bottom