Saskatchewan and Alberta First Nations speak out against the "freedom" convoys and the police inaction
Tuesday
(ANNews) – First Nation leaders in Saskatchewan are adding their voices to the growing list of Indigenous Nations who are condemning the nation-wide protests, known as the ‘Freedom Convoy,’ and the Indigenous cultural appropriation within it.
The statement by the Federation of Sovereign Nations (FSIN) was made after videos of protesters playing Indigenous instruments began circulating on social media.
“The FSIN Executive strongly opposes the actions and tactics of the ‘Freedom Convoy’ protestors, some of whom have been openly sharing ignorant acts of cultural appropriation of First Nations culture and spirituality, publicly and online,” read the statement.
“The FSIN condemns such open acts of racism and ignorance, which are being committed across our traditional Treaty territories.”
The FSIN also retweeted a post from political advisor and treaty right advocate, Andre Bear, that depicted what appears to be two caucasian people at the helm of a pipe ceremony.
FSIN Chief Bobby Cameron said of the protest, “Our First Nations communities have been some of the hardest hit since the beginning of the pandemic. We have been working tirelessly to distribute PPE and supplies to our First Nations because we are highly vulnerable to COVID-19.
“Our families and communities have suffered insurmountable losses because of this horrible virus and our First Nations Chiefs have implemented some of the strictest protocols in the country to keep their membership safe.”
Cameron continued, “This convoy is an insult to our Chiefs, our communities, and to the hundreds of loved ones we’ve lost through this pandemic. Not only are these protestors risking lives and spreading false information, but they’re also disrespecting our traditional drums, pipes, and medicines.
“It’s a disgrace to see our culturally sacred items being used improperly, without proper protocol, in support of anti-vaccine protests.”
The FSIN are adding their voices to others who are speaking out against the convoy including the Athabasca Chipewyan, the UBCIC, and the Algonquin Nation. The Mikisew Cree First Nation in Fort Chipewyan have also released a statement denouncing the protest and the government’s reaction.
The statement pointed towards an Indigenous protest in 2020 and 2021, in which the Alberta government was swift to target largely Indigenous protesters for showing solidarity with land defenders in BC and Ontario.
When a rail line was blocked in Edmonton, the province was quick to pass Bill 1, the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, and police immediately moved to enforce it, arresting Indigenous individuals who were peacefully protesting. Calls for the rule of law were loud from the Alberta government.
“Yet, the rule of law doesn’t appear to apply to the occupiers,” said the statement. “There is little to no enforcement while critical infrastructure is blocked, hate speech, intimidation and defacing property is allowed to continue.”
Mikisew Nation Chief Peter Powder stated: “We are troubled by what is happening in southern Alberta and across the country. The occupations show the racism in the way that government and law enforcement deal with Indigenous and non-Indigenous people protesting.
“Our people are overrepresented across the criminal justice system, from victims of crime to over-incarceration. The law applies unequally to our people, who receive criminal records for minor offences, while we watch occupiers violate the law without any consequence.”
On February 8, 2022, at the time of writing, the convoy / occupation in Ottawa was on its 12th day and with no end in sight.
Jacob Cardinal, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Alberta Native News
Comparing Coutts border protest to Indigenous land defenders inaccurate,
says Alberta premier
Paula Tran - Yesterday
Global News
Premier Jason Kenney said comparing police responses at Coutts, Alta., to police responses to Indigenous land defenders is "inaccurate," calling the situation at Coutts very fluid and complex.
In an interview on the Shaye Ganam show on Wednesday morning, Kenney said operational issues have prevented Alberta RCMP from enforcing the law at the border crossing, citing difficulties obtaining towing equipment as an example.
When asked how he feels about the allegations that the law doesn't apply equally to different groups, Kenney said he "doesn't like it one bit" and referenced the province's Critical Infrastructure Defense Act (CIDA). The bill allows law enforcement to fine and arrest individuals blocking critical infrastructure such as highways and railroads.
"It is never lawful to block a railway, and I've seen with much frustration those kinds of blockades go on, sometimes for weeks. I think that is wrong," he said.
The comment comes after questions arose about the fact that the bill has not been used as the Coutts border protest enters its 12th day, frustrating truckers and residents on both sides of the border.
Read more:
Trucks lining up again at Coutts border crossing, protesters plan to stay for the long haul
The CIDA was passed in May 2020 in response to protests and railway blockades that were organized in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposed to the construction of the Coastal Gas Link natural gas pipeline.
Paula Tran - Yesterday
Global News
Premier Jason Kenney said comparing police responses at Coutts, Alta., to police responses to Indigenous land defenders is "inaccurate," calling the situation at Coutts very fluid and complex.
In an interview on the Shaye Ganam show on Wednesday morning, Kenney said operational issues have prevented Alberta RCMP from enforcing the law at the border crossing, citing difficulties obtaining towing equipment as an example.
When asked how he feels about the allegations that the law doesn't apply equally to different groups, Kenney said he "doesn't like it one bit" and referenced the province's Critical Infrastructure Defense Act (CIDA). The bill allows law enforcement to fine and arrest individuals blocking critical infrastructure such as highways and railroads.
"It is never lawful to block a railway, and I've seen with much frustration those kinds of blockades go on, sometimes for weeks. I think that is wrong," he said.
The comment comes after questions arose about the fact that the bill has not been used as the Coutts border protest enters its 12th day, frustrating truckers and residents on both sides of the border.
Read more:
Trucks lining up again at Coutts border crossing, protesters plan to stay for the long haul
The CIDA was passed in May 2020 in response to protests and railway blockades that were organized in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposed to the construction of the Coastal Gas Link natural gas pipeline.
According to the legislation, each day a site is blocked or damaged is considered a new offence.
Last week, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation chief and council said if the Coutts protest was organized by Indigenous people, authorities would have responded quickly to remove it.
"It is important to recognize the disparity between how Indigenous and non-Indigenous protests are approached by our government. It is shocking to see this blatant disparity as we watch the complete government inaction to address the blockade at Coutts," the First Nation said in a statement.
“If peaceful protests of critical infrastructure at Coutts is allowed, then we expect the same to be true in the future should Indigenous people engage in similar forms of protest."
Read more:
Alberta First Nation calls attention to ‘blatant disparity’ in response to Coutts protests
Jennifer Koshan, a professor at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law, told Global News last Thursday that the criticisms are valid.
“It certainly seems like the actions of the truckers and the other people engaged in the blockade in Coutts fall within the scope of the CIDA, so it is a fair question to ask why the act is not being used in these circumstances," she said.
But Kenney maintains the protests at Coutts are illegal and dangerous.
"We've made it clear to the RCMP and our provincial police force that the government and the public expect the laws to be maintained, but they are responsible for enforcement decisions," he said.
Last week, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation chief and council said if the Coutts protest was organized by Indigenous people, authorities would have responded quickly to remove it.
"It is important to recognize the disparity between how Indigenous and non-Indigenous protests are approached by our government. It is shocking to see this blatant disparity as we watch the complete government inaction to address the blockade at Coutts," the First Nation said in a statement.
“If peaceful protests of critical infrastructure at Coutts is allowed, then we expect the same to be true in the future should Indigenous people engage in similar forms of protest."
Read more:
Alberta First Nation calls attention to ‘blatant disparity’ in response to Coutts protests
Jennifer Koshan, a professor at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law, told Global News last Thursday that the criticisms are valid.
“It certainly seems like the actions of the truckers and the other people engaged in the blockade in Coutts fall within the scope of the CIDA, so it is a fair question to ask why the act is not being used in these circumstances," she said.
But Kenney maintains the protests at Coutts are illegal and dangerous.
"We've made it clear to the RCMP and our provincial police force that the government and the public expect the laws to be maintained, but they are responsible for enforcement decisions," he said.
Northwest B.C. pipeline opposition group submits report on militarization of Indigenous land to UN panel
Gidimt’en Checkpoint, the group opposing the construction of the Coastal GasLink Pipeline (CGL) on Wet’suwet’en territory in northwest B.C., have submitted a report of their ongoing issues to an expert panel of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
The submission titled “Militarization of Wet’sewet’en Lands and Canada’s Ongoing Violations,” is part of an input for a study undertaken by the UNHRC’s Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which consists of a panel of seven independent members appointed by the Human Rights Council.
Each year these experts hold a five-day session where global case studies are presented to better understand treaties, agreements, and the relationship between Indigenous peoples and states, including peace accords and reconciliation initiatives, and their constitutional recognition.
This year the Expert Mechanism session is scheduled to take place in July to discuss submissions from all over the world. Following this, the expert panel will prepare a report on the militarization of Indigenous lands to be presented to the Human Rights Council at its September session this year.
The submission was put together by key leaders of the Wet’suwet’en opposition group including hereditary chief Woos (Frank Alec), and Gidimt’en Checkpoint spokesperson Sleydo’ (Molly Wickham), along with legal, academic and human rights experts from Canadian organizations and institutions.
The submission summarizes the ongoing dispute between CGL and the Wet’suwet’en group opposing the construction of a 670 kilometre pipeline in northwestern B.C., recently leading to nearly 30 people being arrested by the RCMP in November 2021.
Through a timeline of activities that dates back to 2o19, the submission highlights how “forced industrialization and police militarization” contradicts Canada’s obligations towards UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
“The governments of B.C. and Canada continue to violate Wet’suwet’en jurisdiction and the UNDRIP. Reconciliation will not come at the barrel of a gun,” the report reads.
The submission states that Canada and B.C. must withdraw the RCMP and associated policing and security services from Wet’suwet’en territory and immediately halt construction and suspend all permits for the construction of the pipeline.
Through the submission, the Gidimt’en Checkpoint group has also urged relevant UN bodies to conduct a field visit to their territory.
Binny Paul, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Terrace Standard
Gidimt’en Checkpoint, the group opposing the construction of the Coastal GasLink Pipeline (CGL) on Wet’suwet’en territory in northwest B.C., have submitted a report of their ongoing issues to an expert panel of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
The submission titled “Militarization of Wet’sewet’en Lands and Canada’s Ongoing Violations,” is part of an input for a study undertaken by the UNHRC’s Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which consists of a panel of seven independent members appointed by the Human Rights Council.
Each year these experts hold a five-day session where global case studies are presented to better understand treaties, agreements, and the relationship between Indigenous peoples and states, including peace accords and reconciliation initiatives, and their constitutional recognition.
This year the Expert Mechanism session is scheduled to take place in July to discuss submissions from all over the world. Following this, the expert panel will prepare a report on the militarization of Indigenous lands to be presented to the Human Rights Council at its September session this year.
The submission was put together by key leaders of the Wet’suwet’en opposition group including hereditary chief Woos (Frank Alec), and Gidimt’en Checkpoint spokesperson Sleydo’ (Molly Wickham), along with legal, academic and human rights experts from Canadian organizations and institutions.
The submission summarizes the ongoing dispute between CGL and the Wet’suwet’en group opposing the construction of a 670 kilometre pipeline in northwestern B.C., recently leading to nearly 30 people being arrested by the RCMP in November 2021.
Through a timeline of activities that dates back to 2o19, the submission highlights how “forced industrialization and police militarization” contradicts Canada’s obligations towards UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
“The governments of B.C. and Canada continue to violate Wet’suwet’en jurisdiction and the UNDRIP. Reconciliation will not come at the barrel of a gun,” the report reads.
The submission states that Canada and B.C. must withdraw the RCMP and associated policing and security services from Wet’suwet’en territory and immediately halt construction and suspend all permits for the construction of the pipeline.
Through the submission, the Gidimt’en Checkpoint group has also urged relevant UN bodies to conduct a field visit to their territory.
Binny Paul, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Terrace Standard
How police have become more tolerant of civil disobedience in Canada — for good or bad
Tom Blackwell - Yesterday
Tom Blackwell - Yesterday
NATIONAL POST
© Provided by National PostDemonstrators march down Jasper Avenue towards the Alberta Legislature, as they rally against the use of legal injunctions, police forces, and criminalizing state tactics against the Wet’suwet’en Nation in their fight against the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline, in Edmonton Monday Nov. 22, 2021.
When police heard unverified reports of gunfire inside an Ontario provincial park occupied by Indigenous protesters in 1995, their response was unequivocal.
A phalanx of rifle-toting officers advanced on demonstrators gathered just outside the lakeside Ipperwash Provincial Park and touched off a violent clash. By the time it was over, an unarmed protester lay dead, shot by an Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) sergeant.
It was a political and law-enforcement scandal that reverberated for years at the Ontario legislature. And it may have marked a turning point in how police countrywide respond to civil disobedience.
Not only has the OPP itself officially adopted a more cautious handling of Indigenous “critical incidents” but police elsewhere have tended — with notable exceptions — to let protests that block roads, rail lines and construction sites play themselves out peacefully.
Officers in Ottawa seem to be following a similar non-confrontational approach to the trucker-led demonstration in their city, even as local residents seethe about the tractor trailers blocking major roads, the incessant horn honking and harassment.
It all raises the question: in the push to avoid policing wrongs of the past have protesters in Canada been given too much leeway to disrupt people and economies — or should civil disobedience be tolerated as an important part of the democratic system?
For Ken Coates, a University of Saskatchewan public-policy professor and Indigenous affairs expert, the trend is troubling.
“Over the last 15, 20 years we have been loosening those standards quite a bit,” said Coates, also a senior fellow at the Macdonald Laurier Institute. “The rule of law is the rule of law. It’s the main reason Canada has enjoyed peace for so long…. This is not good news for the country as a whole.”
But others say Canadians should accept that peaceful dissent can involve inconvenience or economic loss.
“In a democracy, we have to tolerate some level of disruption,” said Cara Zwibel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. “The idea is to draw more attention and to make it increasingly difficult and uncomfortable for people to ignore what’s going on.”
For politicians, the answer often seems to depend on whether their own ideology matches that of the demonstrators.
When hereditary chiefs of B.C.’s Wetʼsuwetʼen people blocked construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline in 2020, then-Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer blasted the government for “the weakest response to a national crisis in Canadian history.” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said resolution should come through dialogue.
With the trucker protest, the tables have turned. Trudeau refused to engage with the demonstrators, calling them a “fringe minority” with “inappropriate” views. Scheer, meanwhile, posed proudly for a photograph with the truckers after they installed themselves in the capital.
“You can’t have it both ways,” says Coates. “Governments and parties don’t get to pick and choose.”
In the policing world, the tide may have started turning five years before that confrontation at Ipperwash, on Lake Huron. The 1990 Oka crisis just west of Montreal prompted Ottawa to deploy 4,000 troops against Mohawk protesters and led to multiple physical clashes. The police and government response was widely criticized.
© Postmedia, file
© Provided by National PostDemonstrators march down Jasper Avenue towards the Alberta Legislature, as they rally against the use of legal injunctions, police forces, and criminalizing state tactics against the Wet’suwet’en Nation in their fight against the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline, in Edmonton Monday Nov. 22, 2021.
When police heard unverified reports of gunfire inside an Ontario provincial park occupied by Indigenous protesters in 1995, their response was unequivocal.
A phalanx of rifle-toting officers advanced on demonstrators gathered just outside the lakeside Ipperwash Provincial Park and touched off a violent clash. By the time it was over, an unarmed protester lay dead, shot by an Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) sergeant.
It was a political and law-enforcement scandal that reverberated for years at the Ontario legislature. And it may have marked a turning point in how police countrywide respond to civil disobedience.
Not only has the OPP itself officially adopted a more cautious handling of Indigenous “critical incidents” but police elsewhere have tended — with notable exceptions — to let protests that block roads, rail lines and construction sites play themselves out peacefully.
Officers in Ottawa seem to be following a similar non-confrontational approach to the trucker-led demonstration in their city, even as local residents seethe about the tractor trailers blocking major roads, the incessant horn honking and harassment.
It all raises the question: in the push to avoid policing wrongs of the past have protesters in Canada been given too much leeway to disrupt people and economies — or should civil disobedience be tolerated as an important part of the democratic system?
For Ken Coates, a University of Saskatchewan public-policy professor and Indigenous affairs expert, the trend is troubling.
“Over the last 15, 20 years we have been loosening those standards quite a bit,” said Coates, also a senior fellow at the Macdonald Laurier Institute. “The rule of law is the rule of law. It’s the main reason Canada has enjoyed peace for so long…. This is not good news for the country as a whole.”
But others say Canadians should accept that peaceful dissent can involve inconvenience or economic loss.
“In a democracy, we have to tolerate some level of disruption,” said Cara Zwibel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. “The idea is to draw more attention and to make it increasingly difficult and uncomfortable for people to ignore what’s going on.”
For politicians, the answer often seems to depend on whether their own ideology matches that of the demonstrators.
When hereditary chiefs of B.C.’s Wetʼsuwetʼen people blocked construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline in 2020, then-Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer blasted the government for “the weakest response to a national crisis in Canadian history.” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said resolution should come through dialogue.
With the trucker protest, the tables have turned. Trudeau refused to engage with the demonstrators, calling them a “fringe minority” with “inappropriate” views. Scheer, meanwhile, posed proudly for a photograph with the truckers after they installed themselves in the capital.
“You can’t have it both ways,” says Coates. “Governments and parties don’t get to pick and choose.”
In the policing world, the tide may have started turning five years before that confrontation at Ipperwash, on Lake Huron. The 1990 Oka crisis just west of Montreal prompted Ottawa to deploy 4,000 troops against Mohawk protesters and led to multiple physical clashes. The police and government response was widely criticized.
© Postmedia, file
The OPP block roads near Ipperwash Provincial Park during the clash in 1995.
But while Oka led to greater awareness of First Nations issues generally, Ipperwash and the inquiry that came 10 years after the fact focused significantly on policing.
A key result was the OPP’s Indigenous critical-incident framework , a playbook for such disturbances that emphasized negotiation and understanding of native culture and history.
That approach, for better or worse, seemed to be put into action during the 2006 occupation by members of the Six Nations reserve of a new housing development near Caledonia, Ont ., on land granted to the community by the British crown in the 18 th century. Local residents complained that the OPP did little as the protesters harassed and threatened them.
© National Post, file
But while Oka led to greater awareness of First Nations issues generally, Ipperwash and the inquiry that came 10 years after the fact focused significantly on policing.
A key result was the OPP’s Indigenous critical-incident framework , a playbook for such disturbances that emphasized negotiation and understanding of native culture and history.
That approach, for better or worse, seemed to be put into action during the 2006 occupation by members of the Six Nations reserve of a new housing development near Caledonia, Ont ., on land granted to the community by the British crown in the 18 th century. Local residents complained that the OPP did little as the protesters harassed and threatened them.
© National Post, file
Violence breaks out between white residents of Caledonia, Indigenous protestors and the OPP officers at the Caledonia barricade in 2006.
Since then, Indigenous and environmentalist blockades of logging and pipeline construction sites in B.C., Ontario and elsewhere have been allowed to stretch on for days or weeks, while the Occupy movement filled a Toronto park with tents for more than a month before police evictions.
The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police in 2019 released its own framework for handling demonstrations, the goal being partly to respect “unique cultural elements” and minimize the need to use force.
“You can trace the trajectory,” says Jeffrey Monaghan, a Carleton University criminology professor. “There’s definitely been a textbook that’s been developed in terms of policing operations that is conscious of the imagery — high-handed, tear-gas, riot-squad kind of imagery — and the damage that does to police legitimacy.”
But Monaghan still worries that continued police use of surveillance and intelligence-gathering against protest organizers puts a chill on activists from marginalized groups.
A protester shouts as he is arrested on charges of trespassing at the Occupy Toronto encampment at St. James Park in November 2011.
And there have been more-recent examples of controversial police handling of protest.
Toronto officers were lambasted for their response to demonstrations around the 2010 G20 meeting. The RCMP raid that ended a blockade of the Coastal GasLink pipeline was criticized for being unnecessarily heavy-handed.
But if some kind of civil disobedience should be allowed, at what point is the line crossed and more assertive police action justified?
Coates argues that acts like the Caledonia occupation and the blocking of CN Rail lines by First Nations supporting the Coastal GasLink pipeline protests unfairly hurt innocent people and tend to undermine support for their causes.
© Postmedia, file
Since then, Indigenous and environmentalist blockades of logging and pipeline construction sites in B.C., Ontario and elsewhere have been allowed to stretch on for days or weeks, while the Occupy movement filled a Toronto park with tents for more than a month before police evictions.
The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police in 2019 released its own framework for handling demonstrations, the goal being partly to respect “unique cultural elements” and minimize the need to use force.
“You can trace the trajectory,” says Jeffrey Monaghan, a Carleton University criminology professor. “There’s definitely been a textbook that’s been developed in terms of policing operations that is conscious of the imagery — high-handed, tear-gas, riot-squad kind of imagery — and the damage that does to police legitimacy.”
But Monaghan still worries that continued police use of surveillance and intelligence-gathering against protest organizers puts a chill on activists from marginalized groups.
A protester shouts as he is arrested on charges of trespassing at the Occupy Toronto encampment at St. James Park in November 2011.
And there have been more-recent examples of controversial police handling of protest.
Toronto officers were lambasted for their response to demonstrations around the 2010 G20 meeting. The RCMP raid that ended a blockade of the Coastal GasLink pipeline was criticized for being unnecessarily heavy-handed.
But if some kind of civil disobedience should be allowed, at what point is the line crossed and more assertive police action justified?
Coates argues that acts like the Caledonia occupation and the blocking of CN Rail lines by First Nations supporting the Coastal GasLink pipeline protests unfairly hurt innocent people and tend to undermine support for their causes.
© Postmedia, file
Extinction Rebellion and Idle No More members gathered in Calgary in February 2020, blocking off the Reconciliation Bridge and Memorial Drive in support of B.C.’s Wet’suwet’en Nation’s pipeline protest.
On the other hand, he said, a “brilliant” example of a protest movement that largely eschewed such tactics was the Idle No More demonstrations of 2012. They engendered broad sympathy for First Nations and triggered real government action, said Coates.
But others argue that disruptive, non-violent protests by Indigenous people, at least, can often be justified by the fact they’re trying to resolve injustices that have long been ignored by government.
The Ipperwash protest revolved around the federal government’s wartime seizure of land from the Stony Point First Nation for an army base and Ottawa’s refusal to return it later as promised. Oka concerned a golf-course expansion on property that the Kanesatake reserve says was also wrongly taken from it.
On the other hand, he said, a “brilliant” example of a protest movement that largely eschewed such tactics was the Idle No More demonstrations of 2012. They engendered broad sympathy for First Nations and triggered real government action, said Coates.
But others argue that disruptive, non-violent protests by Indigenous people, at least, can often be justified by the fact they’re trying to resolve injustices that have long been ignored by government.
The Ipperwash protest revolved around the federal government’s wartime seizure of land from the Stony Point First Nation for an army base and Ottawa’s refusal to return it later as promised. Oka concerned a golf-course expansion on property that the Kanesatake reserve says was also wrongly taken from it.
Almost half of Canadians sympathetic to ‘concerns and frustrations’ of Ottawa trucker protest
Do the Ottawa protesters fall into the same category?
They argue their rights have been trampled on, too, by mandates that force them to get vaccinated or wear masks in order to keep their jobs or access certain public places.
Critics respond that untenable demands plus methods that have put a city “under siege” and evidence some of the organizers have white nationalist leanings set them apart.
But even if the truckers and their supporters have crossed the line, a hard-hitting show of force by police to dislodge them is also not on, policing observers say.
“Any kind of police brutality at this point will just make people who don’t agree with the protesters agree with them,” said Kelshall. “They have to get the timing right, they have to get the level of aggression right.”
Do the Ottawa protesters fall into the same category?
They argue their rights have been trampled on, too, by mandates that force them to get vaccinated or wear masks in order to keep their jobs or access certain public places.
Critics respond that untenable demands plus methods that have put a city “under siege” and evidence some of the organizers have white nationalist leanings set them apart.
But even if the truckers and their supporters have crossed the line, a hard-hitting show of force by police to dislodge them is also not on, policing observers say.
“Any kind of police brutality at this point will just make people who don’t agree with the protesters agree with them,” said Kelshall. “They have to get the timing right, they have to get the level of aggression right.”
No comments:
Post a Comment