I'm still waiting to see the "police brutality" in that video, too. All I see are police officers behaving quite rationally and surprisingly well-composed, despite the shrill, annoying screams of "SHAAAAAME."

If they think THAT's police brutality, I'd implore them to do some research into what happened in Seattle in 1999, or what happens in South America, or hell, most other countries around the world.

What a bunch of attention-seeking cry babies.

Perhaps the fee increase should now be made punishment for such a messy and ridiculous "day of action"?

Student protest has a proud history, but AlwaysQuestion protestors need some training in non-violent protest.

This includes passively allowing oneself to be removed from the site by police doing their jobs. If the police do not also proceed with care for the protestors, you have taken the high road and your cause will be strengthened.

I am afraid the AlwaysQuestion protest was not well enough organised and they may have hurt their own argument.

A lot of you may be interested in reading similar as well as different opinions posted by other students about the same topic on this other forum. Many of the postings are made by students directly involved with the event, in close affiliation, or in organizations directly affected:

http://thevarsity.ca/article/2845-occupation-is-a-crime-

Warning: It is long and pretty intense/heated, not to mention partially ridiculous on the part of those in support of AlwaysQuestion's actions at Simcoe Hall.

This article criticizes the students' position against the fee increase and states that the increase was previously agreed upon with student consultation. There are two problems with this.

First of all, entirely absent from this article and from other online discussions on this topic is any analysis of post-secondary education as anything other than a commodity to be purchased by those who can afford it. Completely forgotten is the notion that post-secondary education should be public and accessible to all members of our society, in order that all members may have the same career opportunities and the ability to provide a decent standard of living for their families.

Why are students protesting? Because university and college adminstrators are increasing their already high fees. Why are administrators constantly hiking post-secondary education fees? Because our federal and provincial governments have cut their funding to universities and colleges, instead preferring to fund other projects, such as increasing the military budget (at the federal level), among other things.

The same university administrators who benefited from a publicly-funded post-secondary education system with no or low tuition fees when they obtained their degrees in the 1960s, 70s and early 80s are now the agents of its destruction, aiding the government to offload the cost of education to students and their families. We all pay taxes to the provincial and federal governments with the understanding that our government will provide us with services. Like health care, education is one of those services.

Finally, and most importantly, as a University of Toronto alumna who served on the executive of the Graduate Students' Union, I have experience dealing with the administration and bureaucracy of this university. What is described as "student consultation" is often a token procedure in which students' voices are not respected or heard. The Governing Council of the University of Toronto, for example, is composed of 50 seats, 8 of which are open to students who are elected to the posts, and 42 of which are designated to staff, faculty, administrators and community members (some of which are appointed and not elected). Year after year, representatives of the student unions voted against fee increases for services such as Hart House, the Athletic Centre, etc. but these increases went through because the weight of te student vote is disproportionate with that of the other members.

When such processes are by nature undemocratic, it is only right that students take their grievances to the adminstration. And it is only right that the adminstration meet with students to hear their concerns instead of sending police to dismiss them. This entire situation could have been avoided if members of the administration had simply offered to meet with the protesters instead of hiding from them.

Raches is right: If you can afford the time to do anything but school work and a part-time job you enjoy a privilege many students don't.

But Raches' conclusion is absurd. Why should that be held against these students? It used to be that a summer job was more than enough to pay a year's tuition fees (there's a clip somewhere of Dalton McGuinty as Oppsition Leader recalling how he got through law school on a summer job). Whether intended or not, forcing many students (university and high school) to work 60 to 80 hours a week between school and a McJob has been one of the greatest reasons why students' political power has been diminished to the point it is at now. That these students have made the time to stand up against tuition fee hikes should be commended because higher fees now means fewer people to fight them in the future since they'll all be busy asking "Do you want fries with that."

If a reporter is interested in exploring the "two different narratives" of the protesters and the administration, then it seems that along with presenting the observations of Robert Steiner of the University administration, he or she should contact those who organized and participated in the demonstration in order to ask them for their point of view. Citing a press release is clearly insufficient and betrays a bias towards one side of the argument, if the reporter is attempting to appear to be "objective."

The article states that in the video, protesters scream while police "stand their ground." It seems ironic that the university campus is considered to be the "ground" of police officers and not of the students themselves, who along with their families pay taxes and ever-increasing tuition fees to fund their education. A university could not exist without students, and if the students have to go to the extent of staging a sit-in to get a meeting with those who control the university, something is very wrong. If the university was actually democratic and took into account the opinions and needs of its students, they would meet with a delegation of students asking to be heard. Instead, they are ignored, and police are sent to rid the administrators of those who stand up to undemocractic policies they put in place.

Do you know what the best part of this video is?
When the girl asks the police if they are going to work the extra shift for her mom!

Three words: GET A JOB!

What a lazy biotch.

ATTENTION U OF T STUDENTS:
AlwaysQuestion (the group responsible for this protest) is holding another protest this Tuesday, March 25th at 4:15 at Simcoe Hall in King's College Circle.

Some U of T student who are embarrassed by this group's actions plan on having an Anti-Protest Protest to show support for the police and decry this group and their lies.

Please feel free to show up and let AlwaysQuestion know that they do not represent your views!

Wow, kudos to U of T students for actually doing something besides study.

I am totally serious.

Usually only Yorkies get off their study chairs to try to make a difference in something, big or small.

Although, living in residence is like living in prison, even the food. Seriously, some people think U of T would be better if everybody lived on campus, like there would be more community. In actuality, it is the on-campus students that are the most provincial, the most insular, and the least interesting because they refuse to connect with the larger city.

U of T would be better if everybody lived in Toronto, not on campus or the suburbs. You could pay downtown rent on two apartments and feed two people for the price of a single residence room at U of T.

I would prefer a tuition freeze and insane fee hikes on residence until every single student is forced out, and clues into the fact that living on your own is a million times better for almost everybody, except kids who need a babysitter in the form of a Don or RA. People like that will pay the fee, to the benefit of the other students in their respective colleges.

U of T's President David Naylor just issued a statement on the protest. The letter clarifies the university's position on "the role of students and the right to dissent," the residence fees in question, the process for considering those fees, and actually breaks down the entirety of the afternoon in question.

Some snippets:

Both the Provost and I were consulted about these demands. Our answers were identical and confirmed by Vice-President Judith Wolfson, one of those forcibly confined. We do not accede to thuggish tactics by mobs, and we can scarcely engage in rational discourse with protesters yelling obscenities and slogans in support of grievances on a wide range of local, national, and international issues. Above all, it is manifestly unjust to the vast majority of students to privilege a mob as regards access to administrative and governance proceedings when scores of other students engage constructively with those proceedings as members and through the appropriate exercise of requested speaking rights.

Against that background, let me enumerate the concerns that have arisen about the conduct of these protesters. They hijacked the cause of another group, and pressed New College students into participating in a protest that was turned to other purposes. The group attempted to use intimidation tactics to secure privileged access to governance proceedings and the administration. It is clear that some of the protesters engaged in forcible confinement, harassment, and intimidation. Some of them assaulted police and staff alike. One of them made serious threats of harm against special constables and their families. Last, in an astonishing display of historical revisionism, they then portrayed themselves as victims.

We have noted many times before that free expression on our campuses ends the moment it becomes unlawful or threatens the safety of any individual. These events unequivocally crossed that threshold.

In the same vein, those who would seek to disrupt meetings where University policy is being discussed should know that such actions only serve to undermine the very venues designed to seek direction from student representatives. On the other hand, those students who would wish to make their voices heard at U of T should know that scores of different policy-making bodies actively seek their voice each day -- in university governance, in faculties, on our three campuses, in departments, and in student facilities.