Would it surprise you the police version is wildly at variance with eyewitness testimony from the public? First of all, a quick taste of the standard of police ethics at the protest-
Why were the police doing this? One answer: “It’s the superior powers, I’m afraid”, said one policeman in good temper (rather in the spirit of the WW1 infantry song, ‘We’re here because we’re here because we’re here because we’re here’).
Another police officer (something like): “I don’t have to give you an explanation because I am acting on information which is not available to you.”
A third police officer: “There was violence inside the Camp.”
Now this I knew, almost certainly, was a complete, bare-faced lie. I had been inside the Camp up until about twenty minutes before the police started this deployment. Given the atmosphere when I left, it was inconceivable that the Camp had suddenly become violent. It was a party!
So I looked thepoliceman in the eye: “That’s bare-faced lie – I was in the camp just before this started and I know it wasn’t violent.”
His reply? He immediately conceded, with a bit of a laugh, that, yes, he had indeed lied. Feeling a rush of republican self-righteousness hitting me, I asked him if he thought that this is how police officers properly serve the citizenry: by telling them bare-faced lies. Obviously hoping that I would just shut up and go away, he sort-of laughed again and agreed that, yes, this is how police officers properly serve the public.
Now what the people say-
Daily Maybe:- I have an eye witness account from on the ground who saw a man who’d collapsed (rather than pushed or beaten to ground or whatever, although he may have been concussed from an incident earlier).
Protesters called for assistance from the police and helped medical assistance get through. The police were not obstructed in any way.
It is definitely and absolutely untrue that the police were pelted with bottles. This did not happen.
Remember Menezes. Remember how the police use lies as propaganda to cover themselves. Don’t fall for it. My eyewitness was there the whole time and nothing of the kind happened.
Lenin’s Tomb comments from this post:- My boss (yes, a senior manager at the bank I work at!) went over last night to see what was going on. He literally was next to the man who collapsed and died. He swears NO ONE was throwing a thing. And that the reason the police couldn’t get to the guy was because the cops were using dogs against the protesters and the protesters were running away from them (towards where the guy was). Now interestingly, my boss said the guy looked about 50. The man who died went to the ground and started convulsing. So he seemed to think it was natural causes. But other than that bit, every single thing the police have said is wrong.
I will ask my boss to contact the solicitors, as he is a senior manager at the bank and a very unimpeachable source (in that the police can’t say he was involved in any way or had any sympathies to the protestors – they can’t just brush him off). But I won’t hold my breath. He’s a good man, but it may be too difficult for him to do (i.e. to stand up).
Chicken Yoghurt followed the media as they propagate police versions uncritically and a good point made @ Liberal Conspiracy, this is after the Joint Select Committee on Human Rights said only a week ago was “too heavy-handed in dealing with protests”, that is our representatives democratically made it known this was unacceptable. However the police on orders from superiors (working with govt and overseas security) continue to do it, this is clearly not a policing system for a the people in a democratic society. As posted at the Tomb-
Anyone who witnessed any part of this, or has any pertinent information, should write a full statement and contact the legal team at Bindmans Solicitors on 020 7833 4433 and the Legal Monitoring groups present at the demonstrations.
So what really did the elites do in London and why might a belligerent and unaccountable security force be needed, well as Otto observes–
You can read it yourself by clicking right here, “it” being the official PDF from the G20 London summit. But in a nutshell the idea seems to be to empower the world bankers via the IMF, the body of suits that screwed Latin America into the ground in the 1980’s and 1990’s, to get us out of the mess caused by the world’s bankers.
I mean, what could possibly go wrong?