Agent Commenteurs: What people said about police undercover in peaceful protests

I want to thank you guys for the great feedback. The comments you guys left on this post were interesting. I love seeing the reactions you guys have to these situations presented on the blog. As journalists, it is usually not our place to tell our opinion to the world, but to rather try desperately to present the facts, whatever they may be. For most, a situation like this is an awkward one to have to analyze, and thus why I wanted to hear from my peers, those that will hopefully make a living in the news industry.

Elise Lotz said:
"Provocateurs could cause two very different situations. They could be placed in a peaceful protest and cause people to get out of hand, just so that they have a reason to take people into custody to end a movement. Or, the protesters can simply keep their composure and not let the situation get out of hand.
Any result that can come of a situation with placed provocateurs is in the hands of the people"

I can completely agree with this statement. Law enforcement can act as protection, not only for the protesters, but for the law of the land. They really can be the first line of defence against those who disagree with the demonstrators (Brother Mika anyone?).

But with the undercover garb and covering of the face... their benevolent intentions become a little less obvious. Although, it is understandable why they would want police to be immersed within the crowd. You can prevent potentially volitile situations, aprehend those that would be starting riotous behavior, continue the drug war, etc.

Nick Grever of Undergroundpulse said:
"These provocateurs a definitely a disturbing concept, but to dissect the issue, all I can think of is the line: "Don't poke the bear." Yea, these provocateurs may be around to start riotous behavior, and that is horrible, but the protesters must make sure they maintain decorum and not devolved into riots themselves.

And, in the first video, it seems like they're purposefully getting agitated about the three men. I understand their anger, but they're only falling into the trap the provocateurs are setting."

Stated beautifully. If these truely are agent provocateurs, then getting all worked up is kind of what they want. It is important for peacefull protesters to do just that, remain peacful. Although that is kind of easy to say when your eating Cheerios in your undiees while blogging, you have to have a cool head when you are out in the field. As you see in the videos, they are the ones with the weapons and the armor.

Gin Ando said:
" Starting fights with "peaceful protests" (I put that in quotes because I don't really know how peaceful something with hundreds of thousands of people can really be... well, maybe nondisruptive is the word I'm looking for.) and causing Tahrir Square to turn into, basically, a ring of Molotov cocktail fire.

The provocateurs are a scary thing. I know for a fact. I interviewed Paul Erb, who was at the G20 protests and he was saying anarchists basically undermined the entire protest and turned the event into something the media likened into a riot or some such. It's a shame, really, that they get tagged in people just looking to break a window and get a free TV or just looking to start a fight."

I have the pleasure of knowing Paul Erb and was lucky enough to have gotten to work with him in activist organizations. When speaking about these sort of occurances, it is always interesting to notice that the business districts that the anarchists smash up and terrorize are never filled with cops with shields and the cars that are set on fire do not get put out. There is photo-op time for that, but when the peaceful, unmasked protesters make thier way to the parks half an hour later, thats the time to break it up

I try to stay as unbiased as I can, though i feel it is fairly obvious that I am concerned about these events or why would I bother. Thank you for your wonderful comments to everyone who posted.