Don’t you realize by back up the facetious argument of ‘what if a terrorist attack really did happen’ you indulge yourself to the same indecency of the police and those ignorant enough to employ fear mongering.

You try to disassemble my argument. But all you have really managed to show is that you believe waste of money in north America is isolated from greater global suffering of the poor.

Its funny how globalization is great when you can afford your computer, trade stocks online and such…but for you to be too ignorant to understand that connect with the world outside your own is absurd.

well done.

(By the way, I apologize for my
previous typo in spelling “John Pruyn”.)

I am disabled with limited mobility and feel very vulnerable when the police allow me to be attacked and GBH’d and the Justice System?? Did nothing.

Police have do respect, even for themselves and their own, when they disregard the weakest in society and pick upon easy targets and abuse them. This behavior ,by world police, every time the secret government ( Bilderberg Group) tries to take more fundamental rights and freedoms from us, citizens and walk roughshod over our most basic Human Rights, is a sign of what is to come. Totalitarian world oppression.

The survival of the fittest, Dog eat dog brutal governance.

Only we Human Beings collectively can change this NAZI Stalinist thuggery which is emanating from Police who abuse power.

Yes, a full and open public inquiry is needed urgently to bring those perpetrators to justice, nothing less will do.

The police also brutalise, in their own homes and in the wider community, pregnant women and elderly women and men, as well as disabled and infirm. Only monsters pick on the weakest in society and target them for this kind of abuse. No officer of any government of country has any justification for this whatsoever. Their actions are criminal and they should face trial for this.

Having paid close attention to the mainstream media coverage before, during and after the G20 weekend, I’m comfortable in saying that what the mass audience was fed by the time of that poll was a very different version, indeed. It was chock full of exactly the same, misleadingly labeled “live”, video snippets of vandalism, some barely 5 seconds in length, looped repeatedly, while various talking heads alternated between rehashing the property damage and speculating about what might be happening inside the leaders’ fortress.

No surprise, then, that this unanimously adhered to format succeeded in persuading a majority of viewers that the streets were awash in non-stop violence which, but for the legions protecting the perimeter, would have readily imperilled the leaders. Small wonder, then, that those same viewers, with only that frame of reference to go by, would be primed for a forceful Act II – which they got in spades, hence those early and supportive poll results.

A parallel online poll conducted by the CBC also echoed those results at first; but, by the time the votes broke through the 3,000 mark, sentiments had reversed themselves handily, showing some three-quarters of respondents saying they did NOT approve of the measures taken. However, that reversal occurred over time, as a deluge of eyewitness coverage began to surface from a welter of alternative sources, such as this one, finding its way, eventually, into some of the mainstream media.

In other words, there is some evidence that, as audiences became more media-literate, a good many of their opinions were susceptible to considerable change. Therefore, if the kind of literacy Aaron intended was media literacy – whereby viewers would be more aware of, and on guard against, the kind of psychological conditioning to which the networks’ inital coverage exposed them – then he might, indeed, be onto something that the odd typo/grammatical lapse would not disprove.

However, your “glass houses” reminder remains a good one for us all to bear in mind. Thanks.