The Canadian government's decision to host the G20 "meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors", continues to generate controversy.

Rather than discuss the G20 meeting agenda and a mandate "to bring stability to financial markets and to promote economic cooperation", the government and the media have spent their time in the lead-up to the summit trying to instill fear about the potential for terrorism at the Toronto summit.

In the latest saga, the "hunt is on for a black luxury car", after "several off-duty RCMP officers" claimed that they heard shots "fired near King and John Streets." Apparently "Police tracked the car at high speeds before it disappeared into the west Toronto area. No one was hit, but a number of shell casings were found at the scene."

And the shells that were fired from those casings - were any recovered? How does a massive police and military operation with air support lose a car in downtown traffic in one of the busiest cities in Canada?

Government invokes 9/11 to justify $1 billion in security measures

In response to the "fire-bombing" of a Royal Bank branch in Ottawa in May, Minister for Public Safety Vic Toews said that "Hosting the G8 and G20 summits requires that we are prepared to respond to any possible situation or threat."

Defending the more than $1,000,000,000 being spent for the G8/G20 summits, Transport Minister John Baird invoked 9/11 and the RBC fire-bombing incident in parliament, stating that "Since 9/11 security is a new reality and we will not be intimidated by thugs and terrorists who would want to come to Canada and cause us harm. We are going to make sure people are safe."

Toronto Financial District left outside security perimeter

If the Harper government is so concerned about protecting bankers and world leaders from "thugs and terrorists" and "fire-bombers" that it needs to spend $1 billion in order to be "prepared to respond to any possible situation or threat", why then does the G20 security perimeter in Toronto stop across the street from the financial district, rather than enclose it?

With thousands of police on the streets, and an expanded "traffic zone" under their control, this area will certainly not be defenseless from "thugs and terrorists" and "fire-bombers", but what's a few hundred more metres of fence when the perimeter is already so long?

I called Integrated Security Unit (ISU) media relations at Toronto Police Services at 1-888-338-3738 for an explanation. A friendly and courteous Jillian van Acker informed me that the security perimeter was installed for "the protection of the delegates" attending the G20, and that the "financial district was far enough away" from the summit. When I mentioned the numerous media reports that raised concerns about potential vandalism and violence, I was told that "several factors were considered when creating the security perimeter", but that the financial district "was not taken into consideration."

Now I am no policing or security Einstein, but when John Baird calls upon a recent bank "fire-bombing" to defend massive government spending for an economic summit, it seems extremely odd that the ISU would bring its security perimeter right to the doorstep of the financial district, but not protect it. Either the ISU and John Baird live in alternate realities (a possibility I will consider), or the ISU has left the financial district somewhat exposed so that they can engage potential security threats in order to justify the government's billion dollar baby boondoggle.

Protestors should be wary of agents provocateurs

Peaceful demonstrators who intend to be near ISU perimeters and checkpoints should be reminded of what transpired in Montebello, Quebec during protests of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) at the North American Leaders Summit on 20 August 2007.

More than two years after they posed as rock-wielding protestors at this demonstration against the Summit in Montebello, three Quebec police officers were found to have "failed to respect the authority of the law by inciting persons to violence." The ruling by the Comité à la déontologie policière also found that the officers were "disrespectful or impolite, used obscene, blasphemous or abusive language, and refused to produce identification when asked."

Another possibility is that the entire ISU security operation is nothing more than a very expensive psychological operation intended to intimidate protestors and the general population, so that they will be afraid to criticize the government and the G20.

G20 delegates met in Toronto before security measures were in place

The real G20 Toronto Summit occurred on 14 June 2010, when the bulk of G20 delegates met at a plenary meeting of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) at The Allstream Centre, 105 Princes Boulevard. Although announced to the media, it was only reported after the fact by Reuters India. A "kitchen fire" during the meeting led to an evacuation which prevented the media from asking any questions.

Hosted by the Bank for International Settlements, the FSB was created as the "fourth pillar" of the Basel-II Capital Accord, the latest set of rules for risk management adopted for the world's central banks in 2004. The G20 delegates meeting at the FSB were preparing a report of recommendations for further B2 amendments to be presented at the G20 summit this weekend. Adoption of B2 policies was underway when the global credit/debt crisis began in 2007. Economic analysts and industry insiders have criticized the B2 for possibly aggravating the ongoing credit/debt crisis, but this has received no media attention.

ISU publishes Rules of Engagement for G20 demonstrators

Protestors concerned about their safety and civil liberties should also consider the rules of engagement that the ISU has published as Information for Demonstrators Legal Information, which states that "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees certain rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of opinion, expression and peaceful assembly", but that the "rights and freedoms contained in the Charter are not limitless. The Supreme Court has recognized that 'freedom of expression does not extend to protect threats of violence or acts of violence. It would not protect the destruction of property, assaults, or other clearly unlawful conduct.' In addition, in some cases, the reasonable limits prescribed by law will also apply."

Further, the ISU claims that "the Criminal Code of Canada contains various provisions that limit individuals' rights. The following is a list of some of the relevant Criminal Code sections that limit certain activities: blocking or obstructing a highway (Section 423(1)(g)); causing a disturbance (Section 175); common nuisance (Section 180); interfering with transportation facilities (Section 248); mischief (Section 430); offensive volatile substance (Section 178); riots (Sections 32, 33, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69); unlawful assembly (Section 63); breach of the peace (Section 31)."

"Breach of peace" is key to their overall strategy, for the ISU claims that "an arrest for breach of the peace, whether under the Criminal Code or the common law, does not result in a charge. The purpose of an arrest for breach of peace is to end the breach and restore order." In other words, a way to keep demonstrators off the street.

Protestors should also be aware that many G20 delegates will be handled by Toronto Police Services (TPS) as Internationally Protected Persons (IPP) under special jurisdiction laid out by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons.

"Diversity of Tactics" leads to division and assists agents provocateurs

Demonstrators who have been encouraged to respect a "diversity of tactics" should consider the story of Mark Rudd, a former member of the Weather Underground who later came to denounce what he refers to as the "male cult of martyrdom and violence", stating that:

"Movements do not grow spontaneously. Organizing involves building relationships with people, helping them understand what's happening, identifying and developing grassroots leadership, forming strategic coalitions-in short, practicing democracy. Organizing uses a wide variety of tactics, from setting up tables or knocking on doors to talking with people, petitioning, demonstrating, running candidates, confrontations with authority, and nonviolent civil disobedience such as tree-sitting or building occupations, boycotts, or strikes. Look closely at any successful movement and you'll find an organizing method at its base."

Rudd notes that "Whole years of the antiwar movement were wasted in debates between those wanting systematic and disciplined organizing and those wanting violent militancy . . . Years later, I realized that I was doing the work of the FBI for them by helping split the antiwar movement over militancy."

Read Rudd's whole story in the Spring 2010 issue of WIN magazine.