Possible Conspiracies Surrounding the G20 Summit Protests

thecommander · 18-04-2009 12:52AM

Locamon wrote: »

the real question here is how did it come about that we were told this poor man died of a heart attack and the police had no contact with him prior to his collapse?

They told lies. Conspiracy solved.

meglome · 18-04-2009 12:54AM

Locamon wrote: »

t
We now know he was beaten, thrown to the ground and beaten again by the police before he collapsed and died from internal bleeding.

He was?

I saw him being hit in the back of the legs and then pushed. And he died of a heart attack, where are you getting the internal bleeding from?

tony 2 tone · 18-04-2009 01:09AM

meglome wrote: »

He was?

I saw him being hit in the back of the legs and then pushed. And he died of a heart attack, where are you getting the internal bleeding from?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8004222.stm

Doesn't say what caused the internal bleeding yet.

"That examination, carried out by Dr Freddy Patel, concluded Mr Tomlinson had diseased heart and liver and a substantial amount of blood in the abdominal cavity.

"His provisional interpretation of his findings was that the cause of death was coronary artery disease," said the statement.

"A subsequent post-mortem examination was conducted by another consultant forensic pathologist, Dr Nat Cary, instructed by the IPCC and by solicitors acting for the family of the late Mr Tomlinson.

"Dr Cary's opinion is that the cause of death was abdominal haemorrhage. The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained."

thecommander · 18-04-2009 01:19AM

meglome wrote: »

He was?

I saw him being hit in the back of the legs and then pushed. And he died of a heart attack, where are you getting the internal bleeding from?

New coroners report says that it was internal bleeding. Possibly from the fall onto stomach they say.

meglome · 18-04-2009 02:16AM

thecommander wrote: »

New coroners report says that it was internal bleeding. Possibly from the fall onto stomach they say.

Hmm the plot thickens.

Veni Vedi Vici · 18-04-2009 07:56AM

meglome wrote: »

Hmm the plot thickens.

Indeed it does. Was the death an unfortunate series of events or the result of one brutal act?

Mahatma coat · 18-04-2009 08:46AM

whether or not he had prior medical conditions that caused him to be less resiliant to the beating is incidental

it was directly as a consequence of being ATTACKED By the Police that this man died.

if they hadnt attacked him he wouldnt be dead, there will be much arse coverin by the cops on this, with such Sh!te as
agh well ya see it was cause he was already fragile inside. a most unfortunate sequence of circumstances, the office couldnt have known this.

the Officer still shouldnt be goin around pushin people

Ian Tomlinson was Killed directly as a result of his interaction with the police, if they hadnt beaten him then he'd still be shufflin along with a dodgey liver and heart.

meglome · 18-04-2009 04:21PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

whether or not he had prior medical conditions that caused him to be less resiliant to the beating is incidental

it was directly as a consequence of being ATTACKED By the Police that this man died.

if they hadnt attacked him he wouldnt be dead, there will be much arse coverin by the cops on this, with such Sh!te as
agh well ya see it was cause he was already fragile inside. a most unfortunate sequence of circumstances, the office couldnt have known this.

the Officer still shouldnt be goin around pushin people

Ian Tomlinson was Killed directly as a result of his interaction with the police, if they hadnt beaten him then he'd still be shufflin along with a dodgey liver and heart.

I find the whole thing odd.

Firstly we have Ian Tomlinson strolling along in front of riot police with dogs as if he hasn't a care in the world. Now I'm not suggesting he's actually done anything wrong, not for a second. But I've seen riots, sometimes innocent people get caught up and injured by police or by rioters. So what I am saying is walking through a riot like that is a very bad idea and potentially quite dangerous.

I'm also saying we have to give the police the benefit of the doubt, exactly the same way we're giving Ian Tomlinson the benefit of the doubt. If they thought he was involved in the riot then they might also think he was egging on the rioters so the rap on the legs is understandable in those circumstances. Oddly Tomlinson doesn't react after he is hit in the legs which leads on to the shove. We'd need to then establish if the cop was just trying to move him along by shoving him or is he trying to push him over. Assuming what the cops motivations are doesn't prove anything.

It's interesting to note that even though cops get (sometimes very) badly assaulted every day of the week not once do I recall anyone in here ever complained about that. I don't even recall in the many threads about police powers or police states has anyone ever mentioned what a ****ty job the cops often have. I live in Dublin city centre and each and every day I see the scum they have to deal with and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

Secondly the autopsies.

We have two done with quite different findings. For a layman like myself this seems odd, now someone with medical training might be able to explain this I don't know. So you get the suspicion of some arse covering by the cops but again this doesn't prove they intended any of this in the first place.

I'd also be very interested to see all of the footage (unedited) up to where we see Ian Tomlinson sitting on the ground.

And Mahatma let's not use the word beating, as there wasn't a beating. One whack of a club on the back of the legs and a push isn't a beating. If the guy hadn't keeled over and died this wouldn't even be a blip on anyone's radar.

Mahatma coat · 18-04-2009 11:52PM

no but the guy did keel over and die from being Beaten by the cops

And Boo Hoo for the poor little policeman with his terrible job

THEY SIGNED UP FOR IT

if they wanted nice jobs with pretty things they should have become Florists

and no there is no benefit of the doubt, the police shouldnt be Pushin people to the ground like that, show me where thats acceptable behaviour

2 Different Autopsies and te amount of muck slingin happenin about tomlinson makes me very suspect that theres a coverup in place

meglome · 19-04-2009 04:17AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

no but the guy did keel over and die from being Beaten by the cops

Well I dunno what a beating is like in Australia but one hit in the back of the legs and a push isn't as beating as far as I'm concerned. However it doesn't change the fact the poor guy is dead.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

And Boo Hoo for the poor little policeman with his terrible job

THEY SIGNED UP FOR IT

if they wanted nice jobs with pretty things they should have become Florists

Ah I see anyone who joins the police obviously wants to be assaulted, they must enjoy it or somesuch. Like the Garda in Donegal a few weeks ago when a stolen car crushed him up against a wall and killed him, he signed up for that presumably, asked for it like. For all their faults I'll take the Gardai over the scumbags I see hanging about every day.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

and no there is no benefit of the doubt, the police shouldnt be Pushin people to the ground like that, show me where thats acceptable behaviour

We're giving Ian Tomlinson the benefit of the doubt. The cop pushed him to the ground, not good it has to be said, but we seem to be assuming the cop meant to do serious harm.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

2 Different Autopsies and te amount of muck slingin happenin about tomlinson makes me very suspect that theres a coverup in place

I see cuase we can always believe what the protesters say. How about they release unedited video for a change.

Mahatma coat · 19-04-2009 07:30AM

meglome wrote: »

Well I dunno what as beating is like in Australia but one hit in the back of the legs and a push isn't as beating as far as I'm concerned. However it doesn't change the fact the poor guy is dead.

tell ya what, I'll come round to your house with a nightstick and we can work on a definition of beating

Ah I see anyone who joins the police obviously wants to be assaulted, they must enjoy it or somesuch. Like the Garda in Donegal a few weeks ago when a stolen car crushed him up against a wall and killed him, he signed up for that presumably, asked for it like. For all their faults I'll take the Gardai over the scumbags I see hanging about every day.

They should be aware of the risks involved with the job from the offset, firemen sign up to run into burning buildings at times they know the risks involved.

We're giving Ian Tomlinson the benefit of the doubt. The cop pushed him to the ground, not good it has to be said, but we seem to be assuming the cop meant to do serious harm.

The cop is mandated to protect the civil population, regardless of whether he was angry or worked up or frustrated, his job was to protect Mr Tomlinson, he crossed that line, we cannot tolerate abuses of position.

I see cuase we can always believe what the protesters say. How about they release unedited video for a change.

well lets wait for the police to release all the relevant videos shall we.

meglome · 19-04-2009 08:18AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

tell ya what, I'll come round to your house with a nightstick and we can work on a definition of beating

Well as long as it's only going to be a rap on the back of the legs and a push then fine.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

They should be aware of the risks involved with the job from the offset, firemen sign up to run into burning buildings at times they know the risks involved.

Lot's of jobs have dangers. Having a dangerous job is one thing but being run over by a stolen car whilst out protecting others is something else.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

The cop is mandated to protect the civil population, regardless of whether he was angry or worked up or frustrated, his job was to protect Mr Tomlinson, he crossed that line, we cannot tolerate abuses of position.

Imagine that's cops were people too.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

well lets wait for the police to release all the relevant videos shall we.

I'd like to see all the unedited video. I only mentioned the protesters as they have released three edited videos at this stage.

bonkey · 19-04-2009 09:18AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

And Boo Hoo for the poor little policeman with his terrible job

THEY SIGNED UP FOR IT

if they wanted nice jobs with pretty things they should have become Florists

and no there is no benefit of the doubt, the police shouldnt be Pushin people to the ground like that, show me where thats acceptable behaviour

There absolutely should be part of it. That benefit of the doubt that you don't say exists....that's part of the job they signed up for.

They are authorised to use force. Part of that authorisation is a recognition that they are not to blame if something tragic and unforseen happens in the line of them exercising reasonable force.

The day Mr. Tomlinson died was not an ordinary day. He was not assaulted by the local bobby, as he was walking down an otherwise-normal road on an otherwise-normal day.

Yes, he was hit in the back of the legs and pushed to the ground. However, if you feel it is unreasonable to assume that such activity is generally not life-threatening, then I guess you'd also need to see every schoolyard fight as attempted murder.

Despite this, the question still should be asked as to whether or not excessive force was used. And guess what...it is being asked.

2 Different Autopsies and te amount of muck slingin happenin about tomlinson makes me very suspect that theres a coverup in place

2 different autopsies would make me of the opinion that its more likely that there isn't a coverup in place, but rather a serious attempt to find out what really happened. If the findings of the first were unquestionably cut-and-dried, there would have been no need for a second.

That the second occurred, and that its findings were released to the public, and that there is a followup inquiry proceeding are not the signs of a coverup.

Locamon · 19-04-2009 10:10PM

meglome wrote: »

He was?

I saw him being hit in the back of the legs and then pushed. And he died of a heart attack, where are you getting the internal bleeding from?

I think this has been answered fully by thecommander but it appears to me you are making lots of comments on this story without actually following it.

The man in question was beaten on camera, pushed violently to the ground and then hit around the head with a baton. Hardly a tap.

You seem to imply the video being discussed was released by the protestors and edited by them? It was filmed by a US banker who happened to be there and who sent it to the Guardian when he saw the police were denying involvement. The Guardian edited it to remove incidents unrelated to the beating of Mr. Tomlinson. Maybe you are referring to other videos sent in but there is no doubting the evidence of this first video.

I take your point policemen are ordinary people just like the rest of us -just as capable of carrying out a criminal act.

2 different autopsies would make me of the opinion that its more likely that there isn't a coverup in place, but rather a serious attempt to find out what really happened. If the findings of the first were unquestionably cut-and-dried, there would have been no need for a second.

I think bonkey is confusing the guilt or otherwise of this policeman with the cover up that has clearly happened. Yes there have been two autopsies but only because a coverup was exposed by some very good journalism in the Guardian. If this video had not surfaced we would not know that Mr. Tomlinson died from internal bleeding.

meglome · 19-04-2009 11:33PM

Locamon wrote: »

I think this has been answered fully by thecommander but it appears to me you are making lots of comments on this story without actually following it.

The man in question was beaten on camera, pushed violently to the ground and then hit around the head with a baton. Hardly a tap.

So let me see now you used a question I asked 6 posts ago to make a point about me not knowing the story. The answer to which I used to better inform myself and outline what I thought about the whole episode. But in your response you tell me how Ian Tomlinson was hit around the head on the ground, which the videos don't show at all. Perhaps you should spend your time being less hostile and use that time to read up on the story.

And I hope if I ever receive a 'beating' it will consist of one hit to the backs of the legs and a push.

Locamon wrote: »

You seem to imply the video being discussed was released by the protestors and edited by them? It was filmed by a US banker who happened to be there and who sent it to the Guardian when he saw the police were denying involvement. The Guardian edited it to remove incidents unrelated to the beating of Mr. Tomlinson. Maybe you are referring to other videos sent in but there is no doubting the evidence of this first video.

I'm not saying anything other than I'd like to see whole segments of video and not edited versions. That way no one can spin me a story by using edits.

Locamon wrote: »

I take your point policemen are ordinary people just like the rest of us -just as capable of carrying out a criminal act.

The cops have a very difficult and often dangerous job. We're more than happy that they take on all of the **** for society. You'll forgive me for giving the police the benefit of the doubt over protesters that come to these events with masks and weapons. Protesters that are very happy to badly smash up the cities the events are in. But hey maybe they really are saving us all by burning a few McDonalds.

Locamon wrote: »

I think bonkey is confusing the guilt or otherwise of this policeman with the cover up that has clearly happened. Yes there have been two autopsies but only because a coverup was exposed by some very good journalism in the Guardian. If this video had not surfaced we would not know that Mr. Tomlinson died from internal bleeding.

Cool you have inside information as to why the autopsies were different? Feel free to share.

Kernel · 20-04-2009 12:32AM

Good Lord, this place is getting more hostile to conspiracy theories with each passing week. Why bother lads? There are other places to discuss our interests.

meglome · 20-04-2009 01:39AM

Kernel wrote: »

Good Lord, this place is getting more hostile to conspiracy theories with each passing week. Why bother lads? There are other places to discuss our interests.

I'm not hostile to conspiracy theorists, fantasists maybe.

Locamon · 20-04-2009 09:35AM

meglome wrote: »

So let me see now you used a question I asked 6 posts ago to make a point about me not knowing the story. The answer to which I used to better inform myself and outline what I thought about the whole episode. But in your response you tell me how Ian Tomlinson was hit around the head on the ground, which the videos don't show at all. Perhaps you should spend your time being less hostile and use that time to read up on the story.

And I hope if I ever receive a 'beating' it will consist of one hit to the backs of the legs and a push.

This is getting pointless all of the media have accepted, and the police, that Mr. Tomlinson was beaten on the legs, violently pushed to the ground and then hit on the head. The policeman in question will most likely be charged with manslaughter.

I'm not saying anything other than I'd like to see whole segments of video and not edited versions. That way no one can spin me a story by using edits.

The police were given the full unedited version by the guardian and have not questioned the version of events put forward by that newspaper, they reacted by questioning the officer involved under caution.

The cops have a very difficult and often dangerous job. We're more than happy that they take on all of the **** for society. You'll forgive me for giving the police the benefit of the doubt over protesters that come to these events with masks and weapons. Protesters that are very happy to badly smash up the cities the events are in. But hey maybe they really are saving us all by burning a few McDonalds.

Some protestors and some police. Policemen who cover up their identities, which is against police regulations, and beat innocent people to death. Mr. Tomlinson was not a protestor. Again I put the emphasis on 'some.' The noble profession of the majority does not excuse criminal behaviour by some.

Cool you have inside information as to why the autopsies were different? Feel free to share.

This is a conspiracy theory forum and yes here we have one. Man dies, police deny any involvement despite lots of contradictory witnesses and obstruct investigation. Good journalism turns up evidence of a conspiracy and investigation is taken away from police. Man is proven to have died from the actions of the police. Conspiracy pretty clear to me:)

6th · 20-04-2009 09:46AM

And that would be fine except some people let themselves down by wanting to take it further, saying things that simply arent true. He died as a result of his injuries but it cant just be a punch (thats not shocking enough) it has to be a beating.

Locamon · 20-04-2009 10:16AM

6th wrote: »

And that would be fine except some people let themselves down by wanting to take it further, saying things that simply arent true. He died as a result of his injuries but it cant just be a punch (thats not shocking enough) it has to be a beating.

Not sure what you mean but if someone hits me around the legs with a stick, pushes me to the ground and then hits me on the head with the same stick is that not a 'beating?'

Don't think anyone said he was punched?

For the record I don't assume every incident is the result of a conspiracy but this seems to be a pretty clear case, the beating was clearly just a beating but the attempted cover up surely merits being called a conspiracy?

jackiebrown · 20-04-2009 02:10PM

I cant understand people on this forum sometimes. How does a policeman beating a man WHO HAD HIS HANDS IN HIS POCKETS AND BACK TURNED to him get any benefit of the doubt? Its there on the video, plain as day in full colour. The police are not better than me, they can not touch me unless they witness me breach the peace, we are all equal under god. If we continue on like this and let coppers dish out violence then society as we know it is doomed. The cops had their badge numbers covered which they are not allowed to do as they feel they are above the law. FYI meg I live in Letterkenny where that garda got crushed and killed? Are you going to give the lad driving the car the benefit of the doubt?...........No, I didn't think so.

meglome · 20-04-2009 02:17PM

Locamon wrote: »

Not sure what you mean but if someone hits me around the legs with a stick, pushes me to the ground and then hits me on the head with the same stick is that not a 'beating?'

Where is it shown he was hit on the head?

Locamon wrote: »

Don't think anyone said he was punched?

I think he was making a general point. That it's terrible the guy is dead but there's lot of exaggeration going on. Although 6th can speak for himself.

Locamon wrote: »

For the record I don't assume every incident is the result of a conspiracy but this seems to be a pretty clear case, the beating was clearly just a beating but the attempted cover up surely merits being called a conspiracy?

I have no medical training so I have no idea if there's a logical reason or not for the difference in the two autopsies. So I'm waiting for more information before I jump to any conclusion such as the assumptions you're making.

bonkey · 20-04-2009 09:02PM

Locamon wrote: »

but the attempted cover up surely merits being called a conspiracy?

Would that make the repeated, false claims of a beating about the head also a conspiracy?

Locamon · 21-04-2009 02:09AM

bonkey wrote: »

Would that make the repeated, false claims of a beating about the head also a conspiracy?

LOL not confirmed but a beating is a beating...shame on you...how can anyone deny this is a disgrace!!!!

Not a conspiracy fan but this is so obvious everyone has to be shocked!!!!!!!

Mahatma coat · 21-04-2009 02:35AM

Ok so if the Cops didnt administer a 'beating' ( thats what I'd call it, they struck him from behind and pushed him pover with his hands in his pockets, HArdly a fair fight)

Waht will we call it then
I wasnt an accident
it wasnt a gentle nudge
they werent trying to tickle him.

they Asaulted him, from behind in the most cowardly of manners, people say that if he hadnt died this would be a non story, thats wrong, there have been stories every time of excessive violence by the police, this time they went that little bit too far and actually killed someone.

now the next question is intent, Did they intend to HURT mr Tomlinson? damm sure they did, did they intend To KILL him? that has to be left in the hands of a Jury.

its about time that cases like this began to get more than a fleeting mention on the news and a passing WooHoo from armchair pundits who gobble up the Biased medias line of Heroic cop Batters Dangerous and Subervisive Hippie type for your protection.

bonkey · 21-04-2009 06:15AM

Locamon wrote: »

LOL not confirmed but a beating is a beating...shame on you...how can anyone deny this is a disgrace!!!!

I'm suggesting that the allegations of a beating about the head which you have repeatedly stressed, (and which you have made clear occurred seperately to the known-and-shown assault on his legs, and him being knocked over) are made up.

Not a conspiracy fan but this is so obvious everyone has to be shocked!!!!!!!

I'm shocked that you repeatedly stress something that has no evidence to support it as though it were fact.

Brown Bomber · 04-07-2010 11:06PM

Video Proof of agent provacateurs at the G20 summit in Toronto

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XgEI5dCrE

Yitzhak Rabin · 04-07-2010 11:58PM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Video Proof of agent provacateurs at the G20 summit in Toronto

The key aspect of all modern public order operations is to disperse the crowd.

Generally these situations get out of control when the mob mentality kicks in and people who normally would not partake in anti-social behaviour join in the violence. There is always a 'hardcore' element that is the focal point of the riot, and if you can disperse them, then you can disperse the whole riot. Thats the reason why police would infiltrate the protests. To identify the hardcore element, so that snatch squads could arrest them, and thus let the demonstration continue peacefully, before the types of ugly violence that you see when a full scale riot breaks out.

My take on it anyway..

Possible Conspiracies Surrounding the G20 Summit Protests

Comments