There is strong circumstantial evidence that, faced with a public relations defeat over the cost of the two summits, high-ranking members of the government and police orchestrated a clandestine security operation. The operation was orchestrated to inflame the public imagination against all protesters. Strategically, it was designed to justify what is still truly unjustifiable — $1 billion on security.

Policing became the subject du jour, not the massive civil rights violations through arbitrary arrests, or the policies being laid down by the leaders of the 20 most powerful countries in the world. Those policies will punish millions of people, still reeling from the aftermath of the financial meltdown caused by the banks and hedge funds. Citizens have every right to protest the refusal of the 20 most powerful governments in the world to address poverty, climate change and the collapsing social safety net.

Late on Saturday, June 26, after a huge peaceful demonstration, and obviously responding to fresh orders, phalanxes of police acted like an occupying army. More than 1,000 people were subjected to arbitrary and often violent arrest. This extraordinary roundup was almost twice as many people as were detained during the kidnapping and murder crisis of October 1970.

The outrageous nature of most of the arrests was captured by a Toronto Star story highlighting the case of a young, unsuspecting TTC fare collector on his way to work in full uniform with ID. Three officers seized him on the street, roughed him up and dragged him off to police cells. “I’m a fare collector,” he cried. “Today,” replied the police, “you’re a prisoner.” Even more outrageous is the account of a 53-year-old amputee — John Bruyn of Thorold — whose prosthetic leg was wrenched off by police. When he couldn’t hop into custody, he was knocked down and dragged off, lacerating his skin and losing his glasses.

The dominant image emerging from the summit is of a black-clothed “protester” smashing windows, and an apocalyptic image of a burning police cruiser. Those images had their desired effect. Opinion polls now show most people support police actions, in light of the demonstrator violence.

What if the Saturday rampage was allowed to happen? These are serious questions, and need a public inquiry to answer them.

Look at the evidence. Police sources told the Toronto Sun that they were ordered to stand down, and let the rampage unfold on Saturday. Officers standing down throughout the streets of the downtown were vividly captured on video.

Video evidence shows a “demonstrator” trashing two Toronto police cars. He is wearing the same thick-soled boots as those of the police riot squads standing down, and watching, a block away. All the boots bear the same yellow logo. We unmasked three police agents provocateurs at Montebello by noticing that the trio were wearing the exact same military-issue boots as uniformed police. The old saw is: If something looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. This “demonstrator” looks like a cop, right up to his buzz cut. He has everything but an earpiece.

In another graphic scene in Toronto, police undercover operatives, wearing all manner of disguise, converge on their rallying point. They have obviously been ordered to disband. While several of their number, waving nightsticks and screaming, “Get back! Get back!” threaten a video journalist taping the scene, their comrades dash for the police line. The police line opens and a uniformed officer, scanning their clothes for some sort of ID, waves them through. At least one is dressed in the Black Bloc uniform. The police line, using bicycles as a fence, closes up and the undercover officers make good their escape.

It was not widely reported, but the RCMP confirmed to the Star’s Tonda McCharles that it would be employing “crowd infiltrators.” Was the car-smasher one of those “infiltrators”?

To those who would dismiss the possibility of such sinister police and government action as just a conspiracy theory, I ask that they examine Montebello, where despite initial public denials police admitted using agents provocateurs. Recall the MacDonald commission inquiry into the RCMP, revealing that police had performed much more outrageous actions, including burning down a barn, in the aftermath of the October Crisis. Further evidence is the controversial action during the 1997 APEC summit, where it was revealed the Prime Minister’s Office was pulling the strings behind highly questionable security measures.

Finally, for those who do not believe the police are capable of such sinister action, remember the 2006 election campaign. Paul Martin’s Liberals appeared to be putting the sponsorship scandal behind them, heading toward a narrow electoral victory, when the RCMP leaked correspondence baselessly smearing a Martin cabinet minister, and tilting the election toward the Tories. Stephen Harper’s first stop the morning after the election was a congenial visit with the RCMP czar.

O Canada, this is a dangerous moment in the history of our democracy. If just a fragment of this is true, then a full-throated public investigation into the police and the politicians is desperately needed. It is important to note that prime minister Pierre Trudeau took full responsibility for the arrests under the War Measures Act. He ensured that a commission was established to compensate those unfairly detained. Almost all received financial compensation. It would show some leadership for Harper to take a page from that history.