oh and i linked the wrong article, here is one from the toronto media coop debunking the agent provocateur theroy
http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/blog/oshipeya/3966

though i admit, i'm slightly unconvinced actually. but i wasn't there.

g8/g20 summits are fucking sham/show. the real decisions have already been made else were. waste of money as far as i'm concerned and an ironic one at that seeing as how the stated purpose of this summit was deficit reduction.

i'm all for black blocs and the destruction of property, but there are standards. you don't cause physical harm to anyone, and you don't destroy personal property (there's a difference between private property and personal property... like, it's great to throw bricks at banks but you don't spray paint an innocent civilians house).

i am totally unconcerned with the "destructive minority" "ruining it" for "peaceful protesters". you're "right" to protest is bullshit, "you can say whatever you like as long as you don't disrupt business as usual", if you don't disrupt business as usual then what is the point??? there is a time for direct action and i'm pretty sure now is as urgent a time as any.

as far as agent provocateur's are concerned, SOAR and infoshop are saying no evidence of agent provocateur's this time around as far as they see.
here is the statement from SOAR.
there's more articles about it from the anarchists but i'm too lazy and hurty right now, you can find some on infoshop.org if you care to search.

oh i'd like to see the g8/g20 focus on fucking itself.

i'd go about solving the worlds problems by eliminating the "state" and posing an alternative to rampant capitalism and rejecting authoritarianism and oppression in all forms.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'police, montebello, demonstrators' to 'police, montebello, quebec, demonstrators, infiltration, agents provocateurs' - edited by kronosposeidon

>> ^Krupo:

Interesting, 3 minutes in the cops push back their cars.
"You can't stop a hurricane."
Oh dear, geniuses.
Hehe, I like how she considers the Black Bloc types Accused Agent Provocateurs... jury is kind of out on that.
AHAHAHA - last two minutes - he arrives from Ottawa, and is self-identifying himself as Black Bloc... and then calls the police brutal. Comedy.


Good catch - that was a hell of a comment. These crazy police maneuvers against the peaceful protestors gets my blood boiling, but so does the crew that uses every G20 as an excuse to light shit on fire.

Interesting, 3 minutes in the cops push back their cars.

"You can't stop a hurricane."

Oh dear, geniuses.

Hehe, I like how she considers the Black Bloc types Accused Agent Provocateurs... jury is kind of out on that.

AHAHAHA - last two minutes - he arrives from Ottawa, and is self-identifying himself as Black Bloc... and then calls the police brutal. Comedy.

What makes you think that the Vandalism was done by someone who wasn't on the payroll?

What if the vandals are on the payroll, and the cops ordered to arrest said vandals don't know that there are Agent Provocateurs?

What if, the cops are arresting an Agent Provocateur to protect said Agent's cover?

What if the cops are really doing a righteous and just job by arresting a real vandal?

The evidence is circumstantial. Video footage is not enough to make a decision for, or against something.

>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^Krupo:
The burning was at King and Queen, in the financial district, south-mid end of downtown.
This was in an unrelated protest area on the north end of downtown - which was designated as the safe "free speech" area.
Toronto has a very large core, we're not talking neighbouring protests here, but an area 4+ subway stops away.

Do you honestly think that the cops would have just picked someone out at random from a peaceful protest and arrested them for no reason just because they're mad? I mean, that could be what happened -- we don't know -- and if it was then this was inexcusable. But just because this happened in another area of the city from the vandalism, doesn't automatically make this unrelated. It is possible for someone to commit a crime in one part of the city and then walk to another.

That's a hell of a contention to make, and while I would be willing to entertain the possibility that this allegation is true, the old "I heard it from a friend who works for the government" bit doesn't come anywhere near any standard for good evidence. Police agencies in Canada and the US have a long history of using Agents Provocateur to provoke student and civil rights protesters - most recently in Vancouver during the 2010 Olympics, but shaky allegation doesn't equal fact.

I'm with ponce, after a quick google on Jacques Magazine I came up with some interesting finds.

Now, the new "Definition" is " "Explicit sexual content" is defined on VideoSift as gratuitous nudity of a sexual nature lacking any reasonable artistic and educational merit, implying its sole intent is to cause sexual arousal. "

The entire purpose of the magazine however, is to be artfully sexual. It's playboy.. but a high class playboy.
"Where the good get naughty, and the Naughty get Naked"

Now, before I go any further, this is definitely *Viral

Now, onto this EXACT issue, Cover, "A red light says "Stop": this redhead's eyes undoubtedly say "Go": so just what message do her sexy stockings and garter give?

On the (something) theigh of this volumptuous vixen, these innovative intimates from agent Provocateur serve as both an incitation and a challenge."
(or, that's what I can make out, the text is stupidly small and difficult to read)

Anyway.. Wheres it has artistic merit to it.. it's still for an adult magazine. This.. may have to be discussed.

>> ^LostTurntable:
>>blame the shitheads with the bandannas, not the cops.


More and more now those shitheads are turning out to be undercover cops themselves, agent provocateurs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
http://www.videosift.com/video/G20-Epic-Undercover-Police-Fail

Not all anarchists peacefully protest - the dumb, illegitimate anarchists (or agent provocateurs) tend to destroy local businesses (as if that does anything!) whereas those gun-toting guys just sort of wander around and talk about watering the tree of liberty. It's easier (and much more likely) for a group of anarchists' with rocks to throw them at cops than it is for some individual gun-toting Ron Paul loving dude to fire off a shot or two. Take into account the numbers of each group, and the willingness to engage in violent civil disobedience, and it makes sense (to me at least) that there would be much more cops at this event. And I may be uninformed, but did any of those gun-toting guys ever actually threaten violence? (besides "water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants.")

^ That's true.

The "terrorist plot" in question was primarily the creation of an FBI agent provocateur.

Fox's Red Eye is basically praising the boy who cried wolf.

Okay, I've been looking at these, and my official position is that the Republicans have been punk'd. Some liberal agent provocateur has gotten into their system and planted this blatantly absurd idea in their collective consciousness and rallied them to follow it. The GOP has no command and control structure (thanks Mr. Steel) so they can't vet these things before they take on a life of their own. The result is that we see the wingnutiest of the right wing base eat up tons of air time looking like fools talking about how they are going to teabag the president.

This reminds me of PUMA, are the people taking part in these events even Republicans? Has the GOP been astro-turfed?

what's english for agent provocateur?

it's called "agent provocateur"