"socially cleanse"?

Why are most of your clips from the summer Olympics?

I think the importance is the olympic controversy not which specific olympics is being held

wow you are an intellectual person. it amazes me how someone can be so simple, good for you....

FYI that last comment was directed at bonny, not at whoever created the doc. Bonny, if you have a reason for your comment share it and explain why you feel it was stupid!!!!!! If you have an incapacity to debate, then post your comments on http://perezhilton.com/. You will find the banter there will be right up your alley.

it's interesting that the protesters are saying groups are being adversely affected, but then when you go to those groups or people close to them--the first nations chief, the people running shelters--they'll tell you in fact they are benefiting with more jobs and more shelter spaces.

i appreciate a piece like this where a journalist bothers to fact check the protesters' claims. of course, some are hurt by the olympics and i don't dispute that the money COULD have been better spent (though i don't think it WOULD have been better spent). still, making sweeping generalizations about everybody in a segment of society being hurt by the games seems unfair, especially when the majority of people protesting aren't from the populations they are speaking for.

This is one of the worst documentaries I have ever seen. The march wasn't even organized by a "No 2010 Olympics" (which doesn't exist).

It looks at the issue of the Olympics from an extremely privileged position, making efforts to declaim rather than understand protesters' concerns. Your disgusting commentary in favour of forcibly institutionalizing/sending the homeless to detox, shows you have no understanding of what homeless people need or want, or of the root causes of poverty. You even quote a poll from CTV of all places as if it is fact.

The representative from the Four Host First Nations is by no means representative of the voices of all indigenous people in BC, and I am shocked that the Martlet did not interview an indigenous protester about indigenous issues. There were many indigenous people in the rally, yet the Martlet did not present their voices or acknowledge their existence.

As for Cool Aid saying the Olympics will leave a legacy of housing, the homeless population of Vancouver has gone up 370% since Vancouver got the bid, and VANOC has announced it will not be turning units of the Athletes' Village into social housing after all. Bye bye legacy. Martlet - why not interview someone on homelessness who doesn't have a vested interest in not pissing off the province?

When you interviewed me for the film, you gave me only a few seconds to state my case against the Olympics (unlike the pro-Olympics spokespeople you gave several minutes), and then asked me how I respond to "all the activists using violence" against the Games. 1) What gave you the faulty assumption that anyone besides the state and the sponsoring corporations were committing violence? 2)You were obviously trying to skew the direction of the documentary. I'm just glad you didn't put your little violence commentary into the final cut of the film.

The "documentary" is garbage.

I encourage everyone goes to the website no2010.com to get an accurate picture.

Shannon, did it ever occur to you that your opinion isn't given a place in this film because your opinion is so bias, and so extreme that it has left the realm of reality, and entered the realm of mutterings of a crazy person, who doesn't have a foot in reality anymore?

I think the point of the documentary is to give a more balanced look at what the olympics are all about. The video doesn't dispute the ideas that there are great systemic failings of the BC government with respect to Indigenous and homeless persons. It simply presents alternative views on how the OLYMPICS factor into this equation.

It never claims that Four House First Nations will speak for all Indigenous people either.

At minute eleven... there is someone who appears to be a Indigenous protestor commenting on the Olympics. Dont know if you watched that far...

Hmm, further viewing shows that same woman is specifically saying that putting homeless people in shelters against their will is pointless.

So, how was this viewpoint not included.

I think it is somewhat silly to denounce something when you really weren't paying attention and instead were more concerned with commenting on your own small portion.

hey Martlet. Vimeo doesn't work on many slower computers like Blip or Youtube or most other video hosting sites. Actually, Vimeo is the only video hosting site I have problems with, so I could not watch this video.

Ok, if I let the video pre-load, it works ok.

So my first thought is that when Tamara questioned what kind of buildings homeless people were being put into, you cut to images of permanent and transitional housing, and an interview with someone about this kind of housing. While the olympics have led to a small increase in this kind of housing, what Tamara was referring to is the temporary shelters that people will be forced to go to during the olympics. Much different place.

"But is doing nothing a better option?" Who says that we're not doing anything else? Who says that there are not better options? There are not enough surplus olympic villages, detox beds or hospital beds to accommodate every homeless person. The assistance to shelter act will help the police clean the streets during the olympics, SROs have already closed, people sleeping outside are feeling heavier police enforcement. People are being displaced with not enough places to go. Have you ever spent time in a mental hospital? You might question whether such a place is 'advantageous in your life if you had. Also, your numbers are based on some questionable studies. It is impossible to say with any certainty what percentage of the homeless population are mentally ill or addicted, because so few can tolerate any more studies or surveys. Regardless, giving people pills will not change the fact that economic equality is the status quo and corporations like VANOC do more harm then good and the good they do is the trickle down effect. The rich get richer, and we get the scraps. Are you a journalism student? God effort, but as journalism your suggestions for hospitalizing and medicating people and asking "But is doing nothing a better option?" reads a bit slanted and unsubstantiated. Fact checking is important in journalism, and forming an opinion without proper understanding of the issue is premature.

good effort, that should read.

I think the quote you continuously draw attention is by no means definitive. It simply poses a question. Is doing nothing a better option? Some may agree it is considering everyone is master of their own destiny. On the other hand, people inflicted with schizophrenia often feel much better when non-medicated, yet their behavior can often be inappropriate or even dangerous. It is the same with people who use illicit drugs such as crystal meth or crack/cocaine. The housing portion that you believe to be misleading is in fact housing for the homeless. Can more be done? Sure. Will more be done regardless of whether the Olympics happen? Very unlikely. The protesters have every right to complain about social issues but their antagonist, being Vanoc, the IOC and the Olympics is misguided.