So How About That Blood...

A video of one of the protesters who was violently inured while being removed from the observation gallery of Parliament Hill over protest the lack of action from the Canadian government on addressing the international issue of climate change. This footage was shot while being detained by the Parliamentary security guards inside of the Parliament building. CBC had reported that the incident was fake and that the blood which appeared on the Jeh Custer was actually added for show during an online interview. http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2009/10/about-that-blood.html

Take action by calling your local MP and expressing your concern on how a peaceful protest causes harm to Canadian citizens and that there needs to be more ambitious action from Canada on addressing climate change before the United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen this December.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Jeh Custer
• Bill C-311
• United Nations Climate Summit
• Climate Change
• About That Blood
• CBC
• Climate Justice
• Indigenous Rights

[mcbiggest]

Protests are not allowed in the public Galleries. One can protest as much as one would like outside, but individuals or special interest groups have absolutely NO justification in stopping the Parliamentary process held by democratically ELECTED representatives. Security did what they had to do to maintain the decorum and respect for the House of Commons and our Parliamentary system.

[AdamMacIsaac]

@mcbiggest Sad to know that elected official do illegal things and are held in contempt of parliament but they are allowed to walk around like they are the King of Canada.

[PotemkinEmpire]

Apparently, these protesters would rather live in a facist state with no one questioning what THEY consider to be right. Be thankful you live in a parliamentary democracy.

[fightpollution]

Like the video, not the blood!

[grahamnoyes]

Wouldn't mind the trip actually, but let's stick to the issue at hand.

Whether or not I was present at that abortion of a fiasco of a protest is irrelevant. By referencing independent media reports it's evident what you were up to, and by referencing the Canadian Criminal Code, it's evident that it was illegal. Lastly, and whether you refuse to believe it or not, the fact remains that your protest was organized by an NDP insider attempting to drum up support for a private member's bill.

[AdamMacIsaac]

Thanks again Graham, seems like you seem to know everything that I am involved in from having non stop comments on a YouTube page. You do know that traveling to the arctic is a very common practice with educating people on the issue of climate change. May I suggest that you check out one of the many programs that are available like Students On Ice so you can confim your opinion?

[grahamnoyes]

So I suppose since you haven't personally witnessed ice floes melting in the arctic, your views on climate change are invalid and nothing but personal opinion? :)

Your little band was asked to leave the premesis and refused, and thus was engaged in an act of trespass, which I would hope you know is illegal. Under Canadian law, the persons responsible for the property (the government in this case) are entitled to use as much force as is neccessary to remove the offending individuals.

[AdamMacIsaac]

Thanks for commenting while not being actually there Graham, I stood up to see what was happening to those who were being removed and was then by the wonderful association of ageism was removed from the galley. Not sure how illegal those actions are and then was detained since "I Failed to leave when asked" when there was 4 security guards on top of Jeh in a stairwell blocking the exit. Since you were not attending your comments really have nothing but your personal opinion attached to them.

[grahamnoyes]

Heh.

That's quite the allegation coming from someone who was just detained by police for obnoxiously violating every sense of decorum exepected of a guest of the House of Commons. Before you go about making completely baseless statements, perhaps you should check the veracity of your sources, Adam.

As they say on wikipedia, [citation needed].

[grahamnoyes]

I'm referring to the first interview right after the incident, where "Jeh" appeared with his oh-so-grievous injuries, and where the protestors were given a platform to explain their actions and views.

You're referring to the second interview, wherein it's evident from the direction Evan Solomon was taking that the purpose of the follow-up in of itself was to address the discrepency between Jeh's bloodied appearance in the first interview, and how he looked after being ejected from the House.

[TheRyTheGuy]

whats with the "your probably young and wrong" comment. Think before you write old man... your assumptions about people just weaken your argument.