# News & Current Events > U.S. Political News >  Dorner cabin fire was not an accident

## shane77m

Maybe someone can provide a transcript before this vid disappears.

1:28 Cops: burners deployed and we do have a fire.

----------


## pcosmar

Bunch of sick bastards. The whole lot of them..
*
Take this as a Tactical Lesson*

Never let yourself be caught in a fixed defensive position. Have exits. Several if possible.
These bastards have NO Honor.

----------


## MRK

Well if the president can incinerate a 16 year old kid without accusation, evidence, or trial, surely the local cop force can burn down a house with potential hostages just because the accused inside is allegedly a good shot?

----------


## shane77m

Backed it up just in case.

----------


## TywinLannister

> These bastards have NO Honor.


Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.

----------


## AGRP

What if there was someone else in there?  Would they tell the public if there was?

edit:




> Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.


Why did you make the above comment before not listening to the video as you admitted on page 8?




> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?

----------


## brandon

Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?

What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.

----------


## oyarde

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


 There you are, had heard you may have been " disappeared", still in Philly ?

----------


## AuH20

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> *
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.*


Burning the structure down that quickly struck me as very unusual.

----------


## Danke

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


umm...wait?

----------


## pcosmar

> Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.


Ah,, so you readily believe lairs.

I believe "Innocent until proven guilty".

But these sick bastards do not want police brutality put on trial.
The man never had any chance of a trial from day one.

----------


## TywinLannister

I'm not saying this is a strategy the government should be using, but lets be honest. If you had the responsibility of getting this guy out, he had just killed one of your companions, and knowing his history, the smartest thing to do would be to throw a molotov cocktail through the window (or other incendiary device that can be launched). the fire will either kill him, or he will be forced to exit, and you have rifles trained on him and can put him down immediately. very effective, and very safe for the people up against the guy.

----------


## MRK

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


Siege.

Why?

No threat to cops fortified and sieging from a distance.

Any potential hostsages inside would at least have the chance to survive.

Suspect could have a change of heart and give himself up. Allowing for a trial and answers.

The biggest threat to the police came from the potential of a trial, and answers. As far as has been released by the police and media, they didn't care about potential people inside, they didn't even care about their own police force getting killed or injured. They just wanted to kill the guy who was a threat to them if he went on trial. Again, sieging the house would have avoided danger to the officers, avoided danger to potential collateral hostages, but it would have let be them liable from the words of the accused. They have shown where their priorities lie.

----------


## AuH20

> I'm not saying this is a strategy the government should be using, but lets be honest. If you had the responsibility of getting this guy out, he had just killed one of your companions, and knowing his history, the smartest thing to do would be to throw a molotov cocktail through the window (or other incendiary device that can be launched). the fire will either kill him, or he will be forced to exit, and you have rifles trained on him and can put him down immediately. very effective, and very safe for the people up against the guy.


No one is denying the logic of the method employed. I am just questioning how quickly they did this. It wasn't even an afterthought.

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

If the police were competent they'd stay away and wait it out. either dorner would give up or he will off himself.

Hard to believe that the LAPD, SBSD and other alphabet agencies can't contain dorner if nighttime comes. How hard is it to contain dorner and wait it out a few days since dorner does not have food, water ,electricity, heat or anything.

----------


## Philhelm

> Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.


Are you certain that he was the only person in the cabin?  Look, as much as I dislike the police I couldn't fault them for defending themselves from gunfire, but to incinerate someone without even knowing who, exactly, was in the cabin is indefensible.

----------


## AuH20

> If the police were competent they'd stay away and wait it out. either dorner would give up or he will off himself.
> 
> Hard to believe that the LAPD, SBSD and other alphabet agencies can't contain dorner if nighttime comes. How hard is it to contain dorner and wait it out a few days since dorner does not have food, water ,electricity, heat or anything.


Not even a few days. They could have waited a few hours at the very least.

----------


## jmdrake

> Burning the structure down that quickly struck me as very unusual.


+rep!

----------


## TywinLannister

> Ah,, so you readily believe lairs.
> 
> I believe "Innocent until proven guilty".
> 
> But these sick bastards do not want police brutality put on trial.
> The man never had any chance of a trial from day one.


HE DID NOT WANT A TRIAL.  If he wanted a trial he could have surrendered at anytime. He did everything possible to make sure he didn't have a trial. He wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.

I think its disgusting that you are defending this guy. It almost sounds like you think he was justified in what he was doing.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Are you certain that he was the only person in the cabin?  Look, as much as I dislike the police I couldn't fault them for defending themselves from gunfire, but to incinerate someone without even knowing who, exactly, was in the cabin is indefensible.


No I'm not certain. If I was not certain, I would not use that strategy.

----------


## Philhelm

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


A couple hours ago I recall reporters asking if Dorner was alone and the spokesman did not know for certain.  Granted, the knowledge could have changed, but I'm not certain of that.  In all liklihood Dorner was alone, but that is not necessarily certain.

----------


## TER

You could make an interesting movie about the White House calling for it to be burned down.

----------


## pcosmar

> I am just questioning how quickly they did this.


The decision to kill him was made before his name was even in the news.

----------


## jmdrake

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?


You're counting on imaginary confirmation from the same cops that shot a blue truck occupied by two petite Asian women delivering newspapers when they were looking for a red truck occupied by one huge black man?  Seriously?




> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


What's wrong with surrounding the house and either waiting for him surrender or waiting for a clear shot?

----------


## sailingaway

Didn't Fox say in one of their broadcasts this was what happened? I didn't hear it, I was watching another link, but someone in the thread I was on said that.

----------


## devil21

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


I dont know, maybe follow the law and due process?  Apprehend the suspect or kill him only if he is displaying an immediate threat?  What you're seeing is cops too scared to actually go in on a raid so they threw the law book out the window.  Raids are only reserved for pot smokers and raw milk suppliers.  IOW, those that are no threat to the police in the first place.

----------


## sailingaway

> A couple hours ago I recall reporters asking if Dorner was alone and the spokesman did not know for certain.  Granted, the knowledge could have changed, but I'm not certain of that.  In all liklihood Dorner was alone, but that is not necessarily certain.


And even if he was, if they did it not KNOWING he was, that is unspeakable. but I think burning someone alive is pretty unspeakable in any event.

----------


## devil21

"Pull it"

----------


## pcosmar

> HE DID NOT WANT A TRIAL.  If he wanted a trial he could have surrendered at anytime. He did everything possible to make sure he didn't have a trial. He wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.
> 
> I think its disgusting that you are defending this guy. It almost sounds like you think he was justified in what he was doing.


No he was not going to get a trial. 

That was quite apparent with the first trucks shot to $#@! with no option of surrender.

----------


## jmdrake

> HE DID NOT WANT A TRIAL.  If he wanted a trial he could have surrendered at anytime. He did everything possible to make sure he didn't have a trial. He wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.


The two women driving this truck weren't given the opportunity to surrender.

----------


## AuH20

> I dont know, maybe follow the law and due process?  Apprehend the suspect or kill him only if he is displaying an immediate threat?  What you're seeing is cops too scared to actually go in on a raid so they threw the law book out the window.  Raids are only reserved for pot smokers and raw milk suppliers.  IOW, those that are no threat to the police in the first place.


Due process went out the window when he killed that deputy today. With that said, burning him alive that quickly comes off as sadistic.

----------


## sailingaway

> I dont know, maybe follow the law and due process?  Apprehend the suspect or kill him only if he is displaying an immediate threat?  What you're seeing is cops too scared to actually go in on a raid so they threw the law book out the window.  Raids are only reserved for pot smokers and raw milk suppliers.  IOW, those that are no threat to the police in the first place.


How afraid were they of the three trucks they shot up without even getting close enough to see that neither the trucks nor people resembled the ones being sought?

It is their lack of concern for innocent life except their own that really gets me about this whole affair.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Apprehend the suspect or kill him only if he is displaying an immediate threat?  What you're seeing is cops too scared to actually go in on a raid so they threw the law book out the window.  Raids are only reserved for pot smokers and raw milk suppliers.


Sorry, this is not one of those many cases where the cop kills a helpless person or dog. This guy has killed multiple people, he just killed ANOTHER cop. And being a trained former cop, he was just a little dangerous. I'd say he qualified as an "immediate threat". This is a case where cops had good reason to be scared.

----------


## Danke

> I'm not saying this is a strategy the government should be using, but lets be honest. If you had the responsibility of getting this guy out, he had just killed one of your companions, and knowing his history, the smartest thing to do would be to throw a molotov cocktail through the window (or other incendiary device that can be launched). the fire will either kill him, or he will be forced to exit, and you have rifles trained on him and can put him down immediately. very effective, and very safe for the people up against the guy.


The Bane of the State...lol.

----------


## devil21

> Due process went out the window when he killed that deputy today. With that said, burning him alive that quickly comes off as sadistic.


How does due process go out the window when you kill a cop?




> Sorry, this is not one of those many cases where the cop kills a helpless person or dog. This guy has killed multiple people, he just killed ANOTHER cop. And being a trained former cop, he was just a little dangerous. I'd say he qualified as an "immediate threat". This is a case where cops had good reason to be scared.


Ahhh ok, you're one of those types that thinks the law and constitution changes depending on who the suspect is and who the victims are instead of applying it equally to all.  I sure hope no one ever accuses me of something that makes the cops scared.  Would hate to be burned to death by the police acting as judge, jury and executioner since they're too scared to do the job they signed up for.

----------


## TywinLannister

> The two women driving this truck weren't given the opportunity to surrender.


are you talking about where they shot at the wrong people? obliviously that is $#@!ed, but that is a separate incident, separate cops.

----------


## Philhelm

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


I would have left perhaps two dozen or so SWAT snipers to withdraw from the immediate vicinity and guard the perimeter, switching them out in shifts.  Everyone and everything else would be sent back to normal duty so as not to waste more resources on one man.  Eventually, Dorner would lose by being arrested, fighting to the end, or killing himself.  It would also show the public that they weren't hell bent on killing him.  Of course, they _were_ hell bent on killing him, so events unfolded in the way we have seen.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Are you certain that he was the only person in the cabin?  Look, as much as I dislike the police I couldn't fault them for defending themselves from gunfire, but to incinerate someone without even knowing who, exactly, was in the cabin is indefensible.


It was a "signature strike" - like the drones do.  So it's OK if you shred a bunch of first graders, as long as you get the ones you are after more often than not.

-t

----------


## AuH20

> How does due process go out the window when you kill a cop?


He killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??

----------


## jmdrake

> Sorry, this is not one of those many cases where the cop kills a helpless person or dog. This guy has killed multiple people, he just killed ANOTHER cop. And being a trained former cop, he was just a little dangerous. I'd say he qualified as an "immediate threat". This is a case where cops had good reason to be scared.


Scared enough to shoot newspaper deliverers?  I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but this is important.  While what Dorner (allegedly) did was evil, the way the cops not only trampled on freedoms but endangered innocent lives is what's truly frightening.

----------


## MRK

> He *allegedly* killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??


Fixed for you.

----------


## pcosmar

> Sorry, this is not one of those many cases where the cop kills a helpless person or dog. This guy has killed multiple people, he just killed ANOTHER cop. And being a trained former cop, he was just a little dangerous. I'd say he qualified as an "immediate threat". This is a case where cops had good reason to be scared.


Again,,
there is no proof that the man killed anyone till forced to defend himself.

There was never a trial,,only an accusation based on an anonymous Facebook post. 
From that point he was hunted and all evidence points to a kill on sight order.

----------


## TywinLannister

> How does due process go out the window when you kill a cop?


The same way due process goes out the window when someone is threatening your life and you defend yourself. If someone breaks in your house and is threatening your life, you don't owe that person "due process". Now I'm not saying cops had a right to burn him out, I'm just saying that if he wanted "due process" he could have surrendered and got his "due process".

----------


## TER

Politicians now allow any kind of death, including executions, as long as their own ability to rule is heightened.  It is a lust for power which has consumed the halls of Congress and the sicking Fascist state it is becoming.  May the Lord have mercy on this sick man who fought so many demons.  May the Lord have mercy on the victims and on their family members, on all those whose lives have been shaken on account of the last few days.  May the Lord have mercy upon this Nation which is awakening to the powers that fight against her and may You save those who have been elected and who fight for justice and liberty.  In Your Holy Name we pray.

----------


## jmdrake

> are you talking about where they shot at the wrong people? obliviously that is $#@!ed, but that is a separate incident, separate cops.


Same general story.  You said Dorner could have surrendered.  This proved that he couldn't.  And crazy as he was, he was probably smart enough to know that.  Really, be honest with yourself.  If you were Dorner, and you saw that picture on the news would you think "Well maybe I'll end up with the right cops and not get shot on sight?"

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> You're counting on imaginary confirmation from the same cops that shot a blue truck occupied by two petite Asian women delivering newspapers when they were looking for a red truck occupied by one huge black man?  Seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with surrounding the house and either waiting for him surrender or waiting for a clear shot?


They shot up 3 trucks...

well, I havn't seen any pics of the one he stole, so that's probably 4 trucks...

-t

----------


## devil21

> He killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??


No I don't think he was going to get a trial.  He was supposed to be tried under the law or at least be killed as an actual immediate threat to police, not burned inside a house with cops acting as judge, jury and executioner.

----------


## sailingaway

> are you talking about where they shot at the wrong people? obliviously that is $#@!ed, but that is a separate incident, separate cops.


But we were talking about them saying shortly before burning the cabin that they weren't sure if he was alone, and later wanted to make sure it was him.  In other words, they burned it without knowing who was inside, unless we got those statements wrong somehow.

----------


## Danke

> He killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??


So much for innocent until proven guilty and that messy due process $#@!.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Again,,
> there is no proof that the man killed anyone till forced to defend himself.
> 
> There was never a trial,,only an accusation based on an anonymous Facebook post. 
> From that point he was hunted and all evidence points to a kill on sight order.


Its useless to argue with you. Jesus could come down from heaven and tell you the sky is blue, you would call him an agent provocateur and say it was a government conspiracy to keep us from realizing the sky is green.

----------


## MRK

> The same way due process goes out the window when someone is threatening your life and you defend yourself. If someone breaks in your house and is threatening your life, you don't owe that person "due process". Now I'm not saying cops had a right to burn him out, I'm just saying that if he wanted "due process" he could have surrendered and got his "due process".


Let me know how you surrendering works out for you next time there's a shoot to kill on sight order on you.

----------


## Philhelm

> The same way due process goes out the window when someone is threatening your life and you defend yourself. If someone breaks in your house and is threatening your life, you don't owe that person "due process". Now I'm not saying cops had a right to burn him out, I'm just saying that if he wanted "due process" he could have surrendered and got his "due process".


The State should necessarily have a higher standard for due process than the general public.  Also, if Dorner had broken into a cop's home and threatened his life, I would not condemn the cop for killing Dorner.  This scenario is different, as at least some elements within the police force were hell bent on ensuring that Dorner died.

----------


## pcosmar

> Due process went out the window when he killed that deputy today.


NO it does not. Self Defense would make that a justifiable homicide.
That has been held up by SCOTUS.





> With that said, burning him alive that quickly comes off as sadistic.


And that was what got him in trouble in the first place,, taking a stand against sadistic brutality.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Same general story.  You said Dorner could have surrendered.  This proved that he couldn't.


Right, because during the time he was on the run before he hole up in the cabin, he could not have turned himself in

----------


## BarryDonegan

It's impossible to know if someone were in the building before Dorner entered or not without checking the premises prior to his entrance. There could have been squatters staying there or someone with an extra key using the house in an unexpected way.

----------


## AuH20

> So much for innocent until proven guilty and that messy due process $#@!.


They had multiple eyewitnesses on both incidents. He did it. Then he got cornered and proceeded to get snuffed out by the state. Dorner acknowledged in his manifesto about the serious repurcussions for his acts and was willing to die. What I'm questioning is the police department's priority of action in that "burning him alive" was option #2 as opposed to option #6. It's pretty evident that they are as just as unsavory as Dorner alleged.

----------


## sailingaway

> Right, because during the time he was on the run before he hole up in the cabin, he could not have turned himself in


If you had seen police shooting up three separate trucks that didn't even look like yours you might reasonably conclude that if you poked your head out it would be shot off.

If he had been shot in a gun battle, then due process can't be addressed, but when he is just inside and not shooting and they burn down the building he is in..... 

...and media says they don't know if others are inside....

I have problems with that.

I DON'T think the guy is a hero, I think he is a killer, but he still should get due process or how can we be sure any will? The government is getting all together too casual about due process, and I think it needs to be defended on principle.

----------


## J_White

we should thank the Govt that it did not deploy drones to attack that cabin and set a precedent for drone use on American soil on citizens.....yet.

----------


## TywinLannister

> The State should necessarily have a higher standard for due process than the general public.  Also, if Dorner had broken into a cop's home and threatened his life, I would not condemn the cop for killing Dorner.  This scenario is different, as at least some elements within the police force were hell bent on ensuring that Dorner died.


You are absolutely right, the state should have a higher standard. So I don't think the cops should have burned him out. But at the same time, given the danger this man presented, I find it hard to fault them for having a bit of an itchy trigger finger.

----------


## jmdrake

> Right, because during the time he was on the run before he hole up in the cabin, he could not have turned himself in


And he could have been assured that as he turned himself in he wouldn't be shot on sight because....?   right back at you.  Again the picture I posted prove police were shooting people the merely *thought* were Dorner without giving them a chance to surrender.  No that wasn't all police.  But enough to make someone in Dorner's position reasonably conclude that surrender really wasn't an option.

----------


## AuH20

> NO it does not. Self Defense would make that a justifiable homicide.
> That has been held up by SCOTUS.


After he had killed 3 others previously.





> And that was what got him in trouble in the first place,, taking a stand against sadistic brutality.


True, but his pride got the best of him for creating such a declaratory manifesto.

----------


## Philhelm

> They had multiple eyewitnesses on both incidents. He did it. Then he got cornered and proceeded to get snuffed out by the state. Dorner acknowledged in his manifesto about the serious repurcussions for his acts and was willing to die. What I'm questioning is the police department's priority of action in that "burning him alive" was option #2 as opposed to option #6. It's pretty evident that they are as just as unsavory as Dorner alleged.


Not to mention, if I recall correctly from my history classes, there was some tattered piece of moldy paper that claimed the government should not inflict cruel and unusual punishment upon people.  I suppose burning someone alive would qualify.  Now, I don't recall if those punished had to be convicted of a crime, but I think that was the case.  It's hard to remember though.  I wish I remember the name of the document.  It's, like, 200 years old or something like that.

----------


## devil21

> You are absolutely right, the state should have a higher standard. So I don't think the cops should have burned him out. But at the same time, given the danger this man presented, I find it hard to fault them for having a bit of an itchy trigger finger.


Kind of ironic that when they actually knew where he was their itchy trigger fingers froze and instead pulled out flamethrowers.  "$#@! just got real"

----------


## jmdrake

> You are absolutely right, the state should have a higher standard. So I don't think the cops should have burned him out. But at the same time, given the danger this man presented, I find it hard to fault them for having a bit of an itchy trigger finger.


The trigger finger is too freaking itchy when people not at all resembling the suspect in vehicles not at all resembling the suspect's get shot.

----------


## pcosmar

> I'm just saying that if he wanted "due process" he could have surrendered and got his "due process".


Surrendered to who ??
What makes you think he would be allowed to surrender.?

----------


## TywinLannister

> I DON'T think the guy is a hero, I think he is a killer, but he still should get due process or how can we be sure any will?


So walk into a police station and turn yourself in, get your due process.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Its useless to argue with you. Jesus could come down from heaven and tell you the sky is blue, you would call him an agent provocateur and say it was a government conspiracy to keep us from realizing the sky is green.


If Jesus came down today, he would be executed in the same way.  If he was lucky, they would just lock him in a padded room for the rest of his life.

-t

----------


## Philhelm

> You are absolutely right, the state should have a higher standard. So I don't think the cops should have burned him out. But at the same time, given the danger this man presented, I find it hard to fault them for having a bit of an itchy trigger finger.


I don't blame them for having an itchy trigger finger (when they knew it was Dorner, as opposed to the truck incidents).  However, the decision to incinerate the cabin was a premeditated action and not an involuntary reaction.  I didn't expect Dorner to survive, and he even stated as much in his manifesto.  However, I was slightly, and only slightly, surprised that the police moved so quickly to incineration.

----------


## Philhelm

> And he could have been assured that as he turned himself in he wouldn't be shot on sight because....?   right back at you.  Again the picture I posted prove police were shooting people the merely *thought* were Dorner without giving them a chance to surrender.  No that wasn't all police.  But enough to make someone in Dorner's position reasonably conclude that surrender really wasn't an option.


I agree.  Perhaps the only way he could have surrendered was to call the media and ask them to come to his position before calling the police.  Then again, even that wouldn't guarantee his safety.

----------


## pcosmar

> After he had killed 3 others previously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, but his pride got the best of him for creating such a declaratory manifesto.


Proof?

I believe he may have killed one  member of a hit team in L.A. and the one shooting at him in Big Bear.
I have no reason at all to believe that the "Manifesto" was authored by him. That would require some actual evidence. Not the accusations of those with NO credibility.

----------


## TywinLannister

> And he could have been assured that as he turned himself in he wouldn't be shot on sight because....?   right back at you.  Again the picture I posted prove police were shooting people the merely *thought* were Dorner without giving them a chance to surrender.  No that wasn't all police.  But enough to make someone in Dorner's position reasonably conclude that surrender really wasn't an option.


Walk into a police station. Lots of people turn themselves in. Google "surrendered to police". People do it all the time. The idea that he could not have done the same has no basis in reality.

----------


## sailingaway

> So walk into a police station and turn yourself in, get your due process.


How does he get close to a police station without getting killed? When they are shooting Latina ladies in an electric blue (not dark grey) pickup of a different model just in CASE it might be him?

Yes, he could have probably negotiated through an attorney in public in some way where it could be staged. But that he was caught doesn't mean they can decide to burn him alive because they don't want to do a stakeout overnight.

----------


## TywinLannister

> I don't blame them for having an itchy trigger finger (when they knew it was Dorner, as opposed to the truck incidents).  However, the decision to incinerate the cabin was a premeditated action and not an involuntary reaction.  I didn't expect Dorner to survive, and he even stated as much in his manifesto.  However, I was slightly, and only slightly, surprised that the police moved so quickly to incineration.


Do we know they incinerated it on purpose? I'm not saying it isn't possible. I just have no reason to automatically believe it either.

----------


## Philhelm

> How does he get close to a police station without getting killed? When they are shooting Latina ladies in an electric blue (not dark grey) pickup of a different model just in CASE it might be him?
> 
> Yes, he could have probably negotiated through an attorney in public in some way where it could be staged. But that he was caught doesn't mean they can decide to burn him alive because they don't want to do a stakeout overnight.


Also, perhaps he didn't like the thought of what would happen to him once he was in the custody of the police.  We've all seen people gruesomely beaten for lesser crimes.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> You are absolutely right, the state should have a higher standard. So I don't think the cops should have burned him out. But at the same time, given the danger this man presented, I find it hard to fault them for having a bit of an itchy trigger finger.


They declared him a "terrorist" on suspicion.  Not proof.

-t

----------


## TywinLannister

> Proof?
> 
> I believe he may have killed one  member of a hit team in L.A. and the one shooting at him in Big Bear.
> I have no reason at all to believe that the "Manifesto" was authored by him. That would require some actual evidence. Not the accusations of those with NO credibility.


Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?

----------


## Philhelm

> Do we know they incinerated it on purpose? I'm not saying it isn't possible. I just have no reason to automatically believe it either.


Well, I've seen two videos with the police saying, "Burn the $#@!er," or something to that extent.

----------


## sailingaway

> Do we know they incinerated it on purpose? I'm not saying it isn't possible. I just have no reason to automatically believe it either.


Apparently if you watch the video in the OP they say they are getting burners. It was reported from one of the live feeds people were watching (not mine). And someone reported that a Fox news broadcast right after it happened also said they had 'burnt him out'.

----------


## AGRP

> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?


Try listening to the video.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> After he had killed 3 others previously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, but his pride got the best of him for creating such a declaratory manifesto.


Was it even his account?

Why are there 2 versions of the same document?  Did he even write it?

-t

----------


## AuH20

> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?


The cops did set the cabin on fire with CS cannisters. That's already been established thanks to a recorded scanner feed. As far as the Manifesto, he probably did write it, because a few friends of his were mentioned in it, came forward and corroborated their relationship with Dorner which in some cases, extended decades.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Do we know they incinerated it on purpose? I'm not saying it isn't possible. I just have no reason to automatically believe it either.


Watch and LISTEN to the video in the OP

-t

----------


## Danke

> Try listening to the video.


Why would the "Bane of the State" listen to the State audio?

----------


## sailingaway

> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?


But burden of proof is on the state not the defendant.  He is supposed to have his day in court. Particularly when he was in a dispute with the police themselves, who are the ones telling us the evidence.

I happen to believe he wrote it etc, and killed the people they say he did.  But my belief isn't the due process we are all entitled to.

----------


## DGambler

> He killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??


Don't our rights state that he should regardless of the body count? 

The LAPD are the ones who have turned him into a hero.

----------


## AuH20

> Don't our rights state that he should regardless of the body count? 
> 
> The LAPD are the ones who have turned him into a hero.


Yes, but that would entail someone to go in harm's way and physically remove him and his Barrett 50 cal.

----------


## sailingaway

> Don't our rights state that he should regardless of the body count? 
> 
> The LAPD are the ones who have turned him into a hero.



I don't see him as a hero, but I think the LAPD looked about as bad, as if they didn't CARE about innocent lives.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?


Do you have some actual evidence that you don't belong to AQ and we shouldn't drone your ass?

-t

----------


## TywinLannister

> But burden of proof is on the state not the defendant.  He is supposed to have his day in court. Particularly when he was in a dispute with the police themselves, who are the ones telling us the evidence.
> 
> I happen to believe he wrote it etc, and killed the people they say he did.  But my belief isn't the due process we are all entitled to.


Like I said, he could have made an attempt to turn himself in if he wanted his day in court. I am SO SORRY for him that the process might have been made somewhat risky by killing a few innocent people, shooting some cops, kidnapping and tying up people in their cabin, etc. /s

----------


## sailingaway

> Yes, but that would entail someone to go in harm's way and physically remove him and his Barrett 50 cal.


Or wait over night while he thinks it over and try in the morning to talk him out.... THEY put the end to it.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> He killed 4 people (2 police) in cold blood and wounded 2 others. Did he really think he was going to get a trial??


Excuse me?

----------


## TywinLannister

> Do you have some actual evidence that you don't belong to AQ and we shouldn't drone your ass?
> 
> -t


Straw man. I didn't call for him to be droned, or set on fire by the cops.

----------


## TER

Quite an eventful week so far, and it's not even Wed. morning.  I hope this is not the new trend.  I was hoping things could slow down a little bit.  Or maybe I'm just getting old...

----------


## jdmyprez_deo_vindice

When I was watching CNN earlier they had a brief crawl across the screen where the U.S. Marshalls on the scene told reporters that someone tried to escape through the back door but they shoved the person back inside the burning cabin. So instead of taking advantage of someone who could be subdued and arrested to be charged and stand trial, the federal agents decided to act as judge, jury and executioner and push someone that they *thought* was the suspect back into a burning building to be killed.

----------


## sailingaway

> Like I said, he could have made an attempt to turn himself in if he wanted his day in court. I am SO SORRY for him that the process might have been made somewhat risky by killing a few innocent people, shooting some cops, kidnapping and tying up people in their cabin, etc. /s


He never had a trial for that, though, what if he were framed by the police he was saying were corrupt?  I don't believe that, but that is why we have due process, so the guy on trial can present THEIR side.  As I said, if he had been killed in a shoot out that would be one thing, but to just decide it was dragging on too long and burn him to death is revolting.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> The cops did set the cabin on fire with CS cannisters. That's already been established thanks to a recorded scanner feed. As far as the Manifesto, he probably did write it, because a few friends of his were mentioned in it, came forward and corroborated their relationship with Dorner which in some cases, extended decades.


"burners" doesn't sound like CS, it sounds like an incendiary weapon more guaranteed to start a fire.




> Yes, but that would entail someone to go in harm's way and physically remove him and his Barrett 50 cal.


The .50 was supposedly found in the back of the pickup he supposedly stole.

-t

----------


## sailingaway

> *When I was watching CNN earlier they had a brief crawl across the screen where the U.S. Marshalls on the scene told reporters that someone tried to escape through the back door but they shoved the person back inside the burning cabin.* So instead of taking advantage of someone who could be subdued and arrested to be charged and stand trial, the federal agents decided to act as judge, jury and executioner and push someone that they *thought* was the suspect back into a burning building to be killed.


I had read that on twitter, but I didn't see a link and didn't want to repeat it without one.  So he tried to surrender, or at least leave, in that case, and they pitched him into the inferno.

----------


## pcosmar

> Proof that the cops set the cabin on fire? Have any actual evidence that someone else wrote the manifesto?


I have seen NO evidence that he did. The Facebook page was recently created (fabricated).
I don't know if the man even owned a computer. A trial would determine that and there would be forensic evidence and an ISP record. 

I am simply NOT going to believe the word of the LAPD or the complicit media.
They are both known lairs. With a long history of lies and fabrications.

LAPD has a long and proven history of abuses.. As do most Police Departments.

The Concept of "Innocent till Proven Guilty" is enshrined in the Constitution.

The idea of "Guilty by Accusation"  is offensive.

----------


## AuH20

> Or wait over night while he thinks it over and try in the morning to talk him out.... THEY put the end to it.


Their priority of action was extremely flawed as opposed to the action they took, which should have been last resort. If I'm in that SWAT team and they tell me that we have to storm the cabin, with the high probability of one of my team getting cut in half by a 50 cal, I'd probably tell my superior that I'm going home. I wouldn't risk my life so some maniac would be able to exercise his due process.

----------


## TywinLannister

> As I said, if he had been killed in a shoot out that would be one thing, but to just decide it was dragging on too long and burn him to death is revolting.


I agree with that. I never said they should have done that, as agents of the state.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Straw man. I didn't call for him to be droned, or set on fire by the cops.


My point was about proving yourself innocent vs the state having to prove you are guilty.

-t

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> HE DID NOT WANT A TRIAL.  If he wanted a trial he could have surrendered at anytime. He did everything possible to make sure he didn't have a trial. He wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.


 Sure, maybe he didn't want a trial.  It doesn't matter what he wanted.  

Do you not believe in murder trials any more in America?  The response to murder is now to just hunt down and kill the murderer?  That's not what civilized civilizations do.  What is happening to civilization?  Come on, TwinLannister: you don't have to be defending OJ Simpson or think he was "justified" in what he did to think that it's a good thing that he got a trial.  Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, they all got trials.  You can't just go around killing people without trials.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Sure, maybe he didn't want a trial.  It doesn't matter what he wanted.  
> 
> Do you not believe in murder trials any more in America?  The response to murder is now to just hunt down and kill the murderer?  That's not what civilized civilizations do.  What is happening to civilization?  Come on, TwinLannister: you don't have to be defending OJ Simpson or think he was "justified" in what he did to think that it's a good thing that he got a trial.  Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, they all got trials.  You can't just go around killing people without trials.


Please point out where I said the police should have killed him without a trial? You are twisting my words.

----------


## AGRP

TywinLannister is trolling for responses.  Please dont respond.

----------


## Danke

> TywinLannister is trolling for responses.  Please dont respond.


But he is the "Bane of the State."

----------


## TywinLannister

> TywinLannister is trolling for responses.  Please dont respond.


Whatever. Add me to your little list of trolls (people you don't agree with) in your signature.

----------


## CPUd

Here's the other video:

----------


## squarepusher

I agree with Tywin here.

Dorner probably set a fire in the cabin, then put 1 bullet to his head and that was it.

I hope there were no hostages in there.

----------


## TywinLannister

The most recent article I found says no body has been found and the cause of the fire has not been determined. 




> Los Angeles authorities say no body has yet been recovered in the search for a fugitive ex-cop after the rural California cabin he had been holed up in went up in flames, saying officers had not yet began searching the charred structure.





> Dorner, *who vowed not to be taken alive*, had been surrounded inside the cabin since early Tuesday afternoon.* It was not clear who set the fire* in the Big Bear community where Dorner apparently has been hiding since sometime last week.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/13...gitive-ex-cop/

----------


## Danke

> I agree with Tywin here.
> 
> Dorner probably set a fire in the cabin, then put 1 bullet to his head and that was it.
> 
> I hope there were no hostages in there.


I bet you think the people at the Mount Carmel Center also set fire to their adobe.

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

> Come on, TwinLannister: you don't have to be defending OJ Simpson or think he was "justified" in what he did to think that it's a good thing that he got a trial.



_Reaction to O.J. Simpson verdict announcement._

----------


## sailingaway

> I agree with Tywin here.
> 
> Dorner probably set a fire in the cabin, then put 1 bullet to his head and that was it.
> 
> I hope there were no hostages in there.


Is that sarcasm?  Because two videos were just posted.

----------


## sailingaway

> The most recent article I found says no body has been found and the cause of the fire has not been determined. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/13...gitive-ex-cop/


Then I hope people download the videos with the burn language.

----------


## jmdrake

> Walk into a police station. Lots of people turn themselves in. Google "surrendered to police". People do it all the time. The idea that he could not have done the same has no basis in reality.


What lacks basis in reality is your ridiculous belief that someone can "walk into a police station" when the police have shown that they are gunning so hard to kill that particular person that they are shooting innocent people of a different race, build and gender.  Find some case where people where shooting random unarmed people they thought was a suspect and the suspect then successfully turned himself in and get back with us.  Your only response to that was "it was a different set of cops".  Really?  They weren't from California?

----------


## TywinLannister

> I bet you think the people at the Mount Carmel Center also set fire to their adobe.


Some Vikings set fire to it.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Please point out where I said the police should have killed him without a trial? You are twisting my words.


 What I am doing is *replying* to your words, wherein you stated that Mr. Dorner did not want a trial, in response to pcosmar's accusation that the police did not want a trial.

I think that indeed, as demonstrated by their actions, neither party wanted a trial.  That shouldn't matter.  He should get a trial anyway.  *That's the rules.*  If you agree with that, that's good.  It seemed, of course, that you were OK with him not having a trial because you posted that you were OK with him being burned alive in a cabin before having a trial.  Which would kind of preclude him from ever getting a trial.  

You stated that burning him alive without a trial is exactly what you would do.  Quote: "Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint."   Burning a man alive without a trial is a subset of killing a man without a trial.  So you can see where I might get the idea that you agreed with killing this man without a trial.  Silly me.

You stated that Mr. Dorner should be treated as if he had the rights of an animal, not an American man.  Quote: "He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf." 

You stated that killing Mr., Dorner should rightfully have been the top, and in fact the _only_ ("period") goal of the legal system.  Quote: "Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period."

Myself, I do not think that such a system, when it gets to that point, deserves to be called a lofty name like "legal system".  Sadly, this is the very point at which America now finds herself.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Then I hope people download the videos with the burn language.


I was wondering how many had, but YouTube is having it's familiar 302 issue.

-t

----------


## TER

The media has sensationalized this because this is the type of sensationalism which lines the pockets of those who are in power.  We as a citizenry may have a lot more to go through, indeed, it may last our entire lifetime in this world.  I am very thankful to know friends like you here.  May our Lord bless everyone of us and give us His eternal peace.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Some Vikings set fire to it.


Vikings wait till the person is already dead before setting their boat adrift and setting fire to it.

I don't suppose you work for the LAPD?

-t

----------


## TywinLannister

> What I am doing is *replying* to your words, wherein you stated that Mr. Dorner did not want a trial, in response to pcosmar's accusation that the police did not want a trial.
> 
> I think that indeed, as demonstrated by their actions, neither party wanted a trial.  That shouldn't matter.  He should get a trial anyway.  *That's the rules.*  If you agree with that, that's good.  It seemed, of course, that you were OK with him not having a trial because you posted that you were OK with him being burned alive in a cabin before having a trial.  Which would kind of preclude him from ever getting a trial.  
> 
> You stated that burning him alive without a trial is exactly what you would do.  Quote: "Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint."   Burning a man alive without a trial is a subset of killing a man without a trial.  So you can see where I might get the idea that you agreed with killing this man without a trial.  Silly me.
> 
> You stated that Mr. Dorner should be treated as if he had the rights of an animal, not an American man.  Quote: "He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf." 
> 
> You stated that killing Mr., Dorner should rightfully have been the top, and in fact the _only_ ("period") goal of the legal system.  Quote: "Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period."
> ...


Of course the police should to handle the situation in a way where he hopefully winds up getting a trial. They don't have the responsibility to get killed making sure he gets one, any more than you would. Why do you think we have stand your ground laws and the castle doctrine. Some people put themselves in situations where they are much more likely to wind up in a casket than in a squad car, and that is their own fault.

----------


## bolil

> are you talking about where they shot at the wrong people? obliviously that is $#@!ed, but that is a separate incident, separate cops.



Trained in the same methods, inside the same culture.  Qui bono?  Suspect is burnt (hard to identify save by DNA, and who tests the DNA?) to death.  This means he will not get his day in court and will not be able to shed any light on why he decided to start killing people.  His manifesto is not a day in court.  

This entire thing stinks like fish.

----------


## sailingaway

> Of course the police should to handle the situation in a way where he hopefully winds up getting a trial. They don't have the responsibility to get killed making sure he gets one, any more than you would. Why do you think we have stand your ground laws and the castle doctrine. Some people put themselves in situations where they are much more likely to wind up in a casket than in a squad car, and that is their own fault.


Both of those doctrines have to do with self defense when you are in the process of being attacked. they aren't general licenses to kill when you aren't in the process of being attacked.

----------


## bolil

"hopefully winds up getting a trial."  Process, it is what we _do_.  All they had to do was WAIT, Tywin, that is all.

----------


## AGRP

Are trolls briefed about available information before they create posts?  Theres a couple here that haven't even watched the video.

----------


## TywinLannister

> I don't suppose you work for the LAPD?
> 
> -t


Sure, and I LOVE cops! Thats why I started these threads:

Cop Accused Of Seducing Women Involved In Domestic Disputes
Cop Charged With Threatening Man Who Called 911
Greensboro Cops Infiltrate Activist Groups-City Asks Court To Stop Publication of Story
Cop Reportedly Used Taser on Stepson Over Grades
Cop Has To Pay $90,000 of 1.6 Million Excessive Force Lawsuit Against 
Police Brutality Greatest Hits 2012
Cop Beats, Pepper Sprays Man With Down's Syndrome In Case Of Mistaken Identity
Cops Pepper Spray Unruly Mob Of Shoe Shoppers
Charlotte Cop Kills Dog and Nearly Shoots Pregnant Woman
Cops Taser Woman Who Tried To Buy Too Many IPhones

I could keep going but I think I made my point.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Of course the police should to handle the situation in a way where he hopefully winds up getting a trial.


But yet I notice you don't disavow nor retract any of your words.  

The way the police handled the situation was *not* a way in which he could hopefully wind up getting a trial.  Yet you say that they were right in handling it in this manner.  You say that you yourself would handle it in "exactly" the same manner.

You say that Mr. Dorner should have been treated as if he were a rabid wolf.  Yet we do not generally give rabid wolves trials.  Then you say that the police should have handled the situation in a way where Mr. Dorner would have gotten a trial.

In order to have any coherent position, you are going to have to take back some of the things you have said.  We will wait and see which ones you take back; which position you really hold.

----------


## TywinLannister

> But yet I notice you don't disavow nor retract any of your words.  
> 
> The way the police handled the situation was *not* a way in which he could hopefully wind up getting a trial.  Yet you say that they were right in handling it in this manner.  You say that you yourself would handle it in "exactly" the same manner.
> 
> You say that Mr. Dorner should have been treated as if he were a rabid wolf.  Yet we do not generally give rabid wolves trials.  Then you say that the police should have handled the situation in a way where Mr. Dorner would have gotten a trial.
> 
> In order to have any coherent position, you are going to have to take back some of the things you have said.  We will wait and see which ones you take back; which position you really hold.


I did not say the police were right in handling the matter this way. I mentioned that I agreed that the state has a higher standard, and that the cops should not have burned him alive. You continue to throw out this straw man and misrepresent my words.

I won't retract or disavow my words. I believe the man was a dangerous lunatic who killed several people, who had no respect for life, liberty or property. The world is a better place now that he is taking an eternal dirt nap.

----------


## bolil

> I did not say the police were right in handling the matter this way. I mentioned that I agreed that the state has a higher standard, and that the cops should not have burned him alive. You continue to throw out this straw man and misrepresent my words.
> 
> I won't retract or disavow my words. I believe the man was a dangerous lunatic who killed several people, who had no respect for life, liberty or property. The world is a better place now that he is taking an eternal dirt nap.



I think you need some Tolkien in your life: "Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends." <Gan-mothereffen-dalf

----------


## squarepusher

Dorner probably burned the cabin himself then put a bullet in his head, sending a SWAT team in would be too dangerous since Dorner already states he wants to kill as many officers as possible as his goal, also also to not be taken alive.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> I did not say the police were right in handling the matter this way.


 It certainly _seemed_ -- to _everyone_ -- that you did say this.  If you did not believe it was right, then you should not have written that you would have handled it in the exact same way.




> I mentioned that I agreed that the state has a higher standard, and that the cops should not have burned him alive. You continue to throw out this straw man and misrepresent my words.


 You have said some things which contradict each other, I agree.  That was what I just pointed out to you.




> I won't retract or disavow my words.


 Well then you are letting stand that you think that the cops were right to burn him alive with no trial, and in fact they should have gone further and treated him like a rabid wolf.




> I believe the man was a dangerous lunatic who killed several people, who had no respect for life, liberty or property.


 From what little I know of this story, I agree with this.  And for the cops to arbitrarily kill him -- in a suspicious way, BTW -- was very wrong.

----------


## Danke

> They had multiple eyewitnesses on both incidents. He did it. Then he got cornered and proceeded to get snuffed out by the state. Dorner acknowledged in his manifesto about the serious repurcussions for his acts and was willing to die. What I'm questioning is the police department's priority of action in that "burning him alive" was option #2 as opposed to option #6. It's pretty evident that they are as just as unsavory as Dorner alleged.


Ah ha, so he was guilty without a trial.  got it.

----------


## Danke

> Some Vikings set fire to it.



Who were you before your last banning?

----------


## Danke

> Sure, and I LOVE cops! Thats why I started these threads:
> 
> Cop Accused Of Seducing Women Involved In Domestic Disputes
> Cop Charged With Threatening Man Who Called 911
> Greensboro Cops Infiltrate Activist Groups-City Asks Court To Stop Publication of Story
> Cop Reportedly Used Taser on Stepson Over Grades
> Cop Has To Pay $90,000 of 1.6 Million Excessive Force Lawsuit Against 
> Police Brutality Greatest Hits 2012
> Cop Beats, Pepper Sprays Man With Down's Syndrome In Case Of Mistaken Identity
> ...


Whoa, you really are the "Bane of the State."

----------


## TywinLannister

> Who were you before your last banning?


fire11, can't you tell the similarities in our posts?

----------


## Danke

> fire11, can't you tell the similarities in our posts?


No, but your are obviously not new here.

----------


## squarepusher

Also, what exactly are "burners" ?  Smoke Grenades?  Or do police officers have standard issues flame throwers that I didn't know about in case of emergency incineration needs?

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Also, what exactly are "burners" ?  Smoke Grenades?  Or do police officers have standard issues flame throwers that I didn't know about in case of emergency incineration needs?


http://www.angelfire.com/tx2/thesmokingun/GUNS/M79.html

Also known as "Thumper" the M79 40mm Grenade launcher was one of the handiest and most useful weapons of the Vietnam war. The M79 Looks much like an oversized, single shot shotgun, and can fire a wide variety of 40mm rounds, including explosive, anti-personnel, smoke, buck shot, flechette, and *incendiary*. 

-t

----------


## AdamL

> Dorner probably burned the cabin himself then put a bullet in his head, sending a SWAT team in would be too dangerous since Dorner already states he wants to kill as many officers as possible as his goal, also also to not be taken alive.






"Burn that $#@!in' house down!"

"Burn it down! Get going, right now, $#@!in' burn this motherfucker'."

----------


## devil21

Sort of another example of this new notion that police and gov't can just kill people without due process if they're perceived as a threat that the gov't doesn't want to risk "resources" to overtake.

----------


## TywinLannister

> Also, what exactly are "burners" ?  Smoke Grenades?  Or do police officers have standard issues flame throwers that I didn't know about in case of emergency incineration needs?


I read elsewhere that a "burner" is a tear gas grenade, but I have not verified if that is true.

Also, for those who keep saying the "LAPD would not let him get out alive", the cops involved here are from the San Bernadino county sheriffs dept. Big Bear Lake is 100 miles from LA.

----------


## TywinLannister

> No, but your are obviously not new here.


I'm like a Viking returning to a previously pillaged village.

----------


## jcannon98188

I was watching on ABC during the SOTU Address, where they asked if they had confirmation that the body was Dorner's or not. The answer was not yet, but that the Police were still looking into it. Which means, no, they did not in fact verify that it was him before burning it.

----------


## TywinLannister

> I was watching on ABC during the SOTU Address, where they asked if they had confirmation that the body was Dorner's or not. The answer was not yet, but that the Police were still looking into it. Which means, no, they did not in fact verify that it was him before burning it.


I imagine he is a crispy critter. Identification might take awhile.

----------


## CPUd

Here are some burners at 0:46:

----------


## Danke

> I'm like a Viking returning to a previously pillaged village.

----------


## jcannon98188

> I imagine he is a crispy critter. Identification might take awhile.


You ID BEFORE you burn. What if they burned someone completely innocent alive? I understand you have a hardon for the Cops. but can you even admit that they were in the wrong for this? What if it was someone else?

----------


## TywinLannister

> You ID BEFORE you burn. What if they burned someone completely innocent alive? I understand you have a hardon for the Cops. but can you even admit that they were in the wrong for this? What if it was someone else?


It's alot easier to ID someone when you aren't being shot at.

"Excuse me sir, could you please stop shooting at us so we can verify who you are?"

----------


## squarepusher

http://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comme...own_the_cabin/

Ok, apparently there were 'burners' I'm sure they had planned for a hole-up situation inside a cabin how they would deal with it.   Although, keep in mind this is no secret or conspiracy.  Everything is recorded and I'm sure as police scanner feed is recorded, so they weren't trying to hide anything either.  They probably decided that was the best method to minimize officer lives, although I am not sure if I agree with it.  Maybe he was "wanted dead or alive" ?

----------


## TywinLannister

Seems the cops were exchanging gun fire with the cabin, as heard on this reporters tape:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/...rner-gunfight/

Of course, some of you no doubt think the cops should have ignored the flying bullets, ordered the guy a pizza and made friends with him so they could ID him, sing Kumbaya together and he would get in the squad car like a nice fellow so he could have a speedy, fair trial.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

seven "burners deployed" sounds like someone snuck up to to the cabin and placed incendiary devices next to it vs shot something incendiary through the window - as they usually do.

-t

----------


## noneedtoaggress

So has anyone yet mentioned that the cabin was someone's property they decided to destroy?

Maybe they'll buy him a truck.

----------


## S.Shorland

Robots.Send a ManHunter robot in there,set to use its own logic and it will pull his arms and legs off while purportedly trying to apprehend/restrain him.Population cowed.Job done.



> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.

----------


## devil21

> So has anyone yet mentioned that the cabin was someone's property they decided to destroy?
> 
> Maybe they'll buy him a truck.


Ya know, this has been confusing me all day.  I saw claims that it wasn't his cabin and claims that it was his cabin.  Still not sure which it is.  How was there a big ammo stash there if it wasn't his cabin and he just took hostages there?

----------


## TywinLannister

> So has anyone yet mentioned that the cabin was someone's property they decided to destroy?
> 
> Maybe they'll buy him a truck.


I'm sure the property owner would have preferred to deal with Chris Dorner himself so that his cabin didn't get damaged.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Ya know, this has been confusing me all day.  I saw claims that it wasn't his cabin and claims that it was his cabin.  Still not sure which it is.  How was there a big ammo stash there if it wasn't his cabin and he just took hostages there?


It wasn't his cabin
He didn't take hostages there.
Be brought the ammo.  (though there might have been some in the cabin allready - though unlikely as it was a rental.

-t

----------


## TywinLannister

My understanding is that it was a different cabin where he took hostages. 




> Before the shootout, Christopher Dorner allegedly broke into a cabin days ago in the San Bernardino Mountains, tied up the couple inside and held them hostage until he left Tuesday morning, a source said.
> 
> Then Dorner was allegedly spotted by state Fish and Wildlife officers in a white pickup truck, the source said. When they attempted to stop him, Dorner crashed the truck during a chase and exchanged gunfire with the officers* as he fled into another cabin, where he was quickly surrounded by San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies*, the source said.
> 
> Dorner is now surrounded by police inside a Big Bear area cabin after allegedly getting into a gun battle that left two San Bernardino County Sheriff’s deputies wounded.
> 
> The source said one deputy was hit as Dorner fired out of the cabin and a second was injured when Dorner exited the back of the cabin, deployed a smoke bomb and opened fire again in an apparent attempt to flee. Dorner was driven back inside the cabin, the source said.


So he shoots at the cops from the cabin, throws a smoke bomb at the cops, shoots at the cops again. But the cops should have been more restrained and tried to ID him, make sure he gets a trial...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...e-hostage.html

----------


## devil21

> It wasn't his cabin
> He didn't take hostages there.
> Be brought the ammo.  (though there might have been some in the cabin allready - though unlikely as it was a rental.
> 
> -t


Thanks for clarification.  That makes the burning that much worse.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

In listening to the recordings again, it becomes clear that this was pre-meditated murder.  Not a flash-bang or CS gas grenade gone bad.  They analyzed flammable material in the dwelling - like the mattresses on end and strategically placed SEVEN "burners" around and under the cabin. (which I had previously thought was SWAT slang).  It wasn't.

LA Police Gear
http://www.lapolicegear.com/stanspor...o-burner-.html



-t

----------


## Uncle Emanuel Watkins

> Maybe someone can provide a transcript before this vid disappears.
> 
> 1:28 Cops: burners deployed and we do have a fire.


In Texas, there is a story about how a small unit of about ten Texas Rangers had about three hundred Mexican bandits trapped in a house.  They asked the U.S. government for assistance in transporting the bandits.  Misunderstanding the situation, the U.S. government sent word for the Rangers to surrender thinking they were the ones pinned down.  After shaking their heads at the corruption of the Federal government, the Rangers sent in word warning the bandits to come out and lay down their weapons.  Sure enough, at the time designated for them to do so, every one of the three hundred Mexican bandits came out and laid down their weapons.

The Texas Rangers were formed as a militia to protect Texan settlers while the official Texas army fought Santa Anna.

----------


## Philhelm

> So he shoots at the cops from the cabin, throws a smoke bomb at the cops, shoots at the cops again. But the cops should have been more restrained and tried to ID him, make sure he gets a trial...


I understand what you're saying.  If the police had engaged Dorner in a firefight and had killed him, I would have nothing negative to say.  I can't fault even the police for defending their lives.  The difference here is that it appears they quickly moved to employing extreme tactics and it is, as far as I know, currently unknown what information the police had regarding who was in the cabin.  I consider incineration to be cruel and unusual punishment.  A sniper...hell, even a drone strike I'm afraid to say, would have been more civilized.  Combined with the itchy trigger fingers resulting in a few incidents against innocent citizens, it seems that the police had no intention of even attempting an arrest.  The police wanting to keep the media away is also suspicious.

----------


## TywinLannister

> In listening to the recordings again, it becomes clear that this was pre-meditated murder.  Not a flash-bang or CS gas grenade gone bad.  They analyzed flammable material in the dwelling - like the mattresses on end and strategically placed SEVEN "burners" around and under the cabin. (which I had previously thought was SWAT slang).  It wasn't.
> 
> LA Police Gear
> http://www.lapolicegear.com/stanspor...o-burner-.html
> 
> 
> 
> -t


Thats really stretching it. They set fires with strategically placed propane stoves? Who the hell would set a fire that way?

----------


## Uncle Emanuel Watkins

> Thats really stretching it. They set fires with strategically placed propane stoves? Who the hell would set a fire that way?


Who?

----------


## TywinLannister

> Who?


lol

----------


## TywinLannister

another thing to keep in mind is that he set his truck on fire, and there was a report that a can of gas may have been discovered at the first cabin he broke into...apparently he likes to set things on fire. just sayin...

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> another thing to keep in mind is that he set his truck on fire, and there was a report that a can of gas may have been discovered at the first cabin he broke into...apparently he likes to set things on fire. just sayin...


^^^^Fed dis-info/PSYOPS officer?

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

FOX just announced they found a charred corps and ID'd it as Dormer.

-t

----------


## devil21

> Thats really stretching it. They set fires with strategically placed propane stoves? Who the hell would set a fire that way?


Yeah gotta agree with you here.  I have a similar stove and that's not near enough to start a fire in a house even if I put a few of them around.  Im sure tangent was correct about burners being incendiary grenades in a previous post.

Is kinda funny that the stove in the link is backordered 8-10 days.  LAPD stocked up?

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Yeah gotta agree with you here.  I have a similar stove and that's not near enough to start a fire in a house even if I put a few of them around.  Im sure tangent was correct about burners being incendiary grenades in a previous post.
> 
> Is kinda funny that the stove in the link is backordered 8-10 days.  LAPD stocked up?


Not saying it was that model.  I have a area heater that runs off a propane tank... There are some you can REALLY crank up as to flame height.  You could also put kindling on the burners...

It was a deliberate, pre-positioned (SEVEN OF UM!) incendiary! per the recordings... First degree MURDER!!!!

A execution - nothing less!

-t

----------


## S.Shorland

Hopefully this will cause people to look again at the Waco murders and thereby wake up a few dozen/hundred more people in your country.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

Thanks Devil21 - your MB is full.

-t

----------


## libertyjam

> Bunch of sick bastards. The whole lot of them..
> *
> Take this as a Tactical Lesson*
> 
> Never let yourself be caught in a fixed defensive position. Have exits. Several if possible.
> These bastards have NO Honor.


We've known that positively since 1992

----------


## jmdrake

> Yeah gotta agree with you here.  I have a similar stove and that's not near enough to start a fire in a house even if I put a few of them around.  Im sure tangent was correct about burners being incendiary grenades in a previous post.
> 
> Is kinda funny that the stove in the link is backordered 8-10 days.  LAPD stocked up?


Not sure if serious.  A well placed (or misplaced) cigarette butt has been known to burn down an entire hotel before.  I ain't saying that's what happened here.  But it's not past the range of the possible.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

WHOA! FOX and Friends just now....

You know if one guy could do this, what could a network of guys do?
What do you say about his supporters?

LAPD Cop (male): well, we are prepared and trained for this type of thing... (looks very uncomfortable - scuze me while I change my panties... LOL!)  

Thanks Fox and Friends for voicing the questions...  It was AWESOME!

-t

----------


## tod evans

Well said!





> What I am doing is *replying* to your words, wherein you stated that Mr. Dorner did not want a trial, in response to pcosmar's accusation that the police did not want a trial.
> 
> I think that indeed, as demonstrated by their actions, neither party wanted a trial.  That shouldn't matter.  He should get a trial anyway.  *That's the rules.*  If you agree with that, that's good.  It seemed, of course, that you were OK with him not having a trial because you posted that you were OK with him being burned alive in a cabin before having a trial.  Which would kind of preclude him from ever getting a trial.  
> 
> You stated that burning him alive without a trial is exactly what you would do.  Quote: "Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint."   Burning a man alive without a trial is a subset of killing a man without a trial.  So you can see where I might get the idea that you agreed with killing this man without a trial.  Silly me.
> 
> You stated that Mr. Dorner should be treated as if he had the rights of an animal, not an American man.  Quote: "He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf." 
> 
> You stated that killing Mr., Dorner should rightfully have been the top, and in fact the _only_ ("period") goal of the legal system.  Quote: "Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period."
> ...

----------


## awake

They burned it to save entering a booby trapped pill box.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> They burned it to save entering a booby trapped pill box.


I think this is the only post of yours here that I have not applauded.

-t

----------


## awake

> I think this is the only post of yours here that I have not applauded.
> 
> -t


Simply stating their thought process. Not my judgment.

Judgment:

What needs to be pointed out very clearly: Because Dorner was acting against bad people does not automatically cast him as a good person. There were many criminal acts carried out by people in this story including Dorner. This was a dispute between criminals with innocents in the middle of it.

While burning human beings alive was a reminder of Waco, Dorner was not a Branch Dividian, nor shared thier innocence.

I get it. People want to see leviathan get whats coming to it and want defiant shooting citizens to finally solve the problem of a insidious creeping totalitarianism. But once you understand that violence against the state only grows and nourishes it, one will need to adopt other more powerful methods instead.

----------


## tod evans

The only things I believe surrounding this whole debacle is that "The-Newz" has been providing approved for the public releases and these releases target a person believed to have stood against police corruption..

Pictures prove that a truck was blasted by gunfire and a structure burnt to the ground, but everything else to me is just supposition.

Even if what was "reported" has some truth in it, a trial by jury would be necessary to try and ascertain truth... Doesn't look like that's going to happen..........

----------


## squarepusher

So what should the police have done in this situation?  Order him a pizza give him some grape soda to come out?

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Simply stating their thought process. Not my judgment.
> 
> Judgment:
> 
> What needs to be pointed out very clearly: Because Dorner was acting against bad people does not automatically cast him as a good person. There were many criminal acts carried out by people in this story including Dorner. This was a dispute between criminals with innocents in the middle of it.
> 
> While burning human beings alive was a reminder of Waco, Dorner was not a Branch Dividian, nor shared thier innocence.


kk - very fair.  I was under the impression, based on your post that you were one of the lynch gang mentality.




> So what should the police have done in this situation?  Order him a pizza give him some grape soda to come out?


They usually do - and drug the pizza and drink...

Pizza and grape drink??? - YEACH!

-t

----------


## tod evans

> So what should the police have done in this situation?  Order him a pizza give him some grape soda to come out?


The "police" should have backed the $#@! up and chilled out.

If what was portrayed on "The-Newz" was even close to reality there is absolutely no moral justification to cook a man.

This isn't Salem Mass.1692 for heavens sake....

This idea that it's acceptable, let alone legal, for government agents to fry suspects is abhorrent to me.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> This isn't Salem Mass.1692 for heavens sake....


Funny that you mention that...

One of my ancestors came over on the Mayflower.

One of my ancestors was MURDERED on the ACCUSATION that she was a witch back in 1692...

I'm kinda holding a grudge...

-t

----------


## tod evans

Well trying to hold the public financially and morally liable for the actions of those long dead has proved fruitful for several groups of people.......

[Just being a smart-ass]





> Funny that you mention that...
> 
> One of my ancestors came over on the Mayflower.
> 
> One of my ancestors was MURDERED on the ACCUSATION that she was a witch back in 1692...
> 
> I'm kinda holding a grudge...
> 
> -t

----------


## Occam's Banana

> The "police" should have backed the $#@! up and chilled out.
> 
> If what was portrayed on "The-Newz" was even close to reality there is absolutely no moral justification to cook a man.
> 
> This isn't Salem Mass.1692 for heavens sake....
> 
> This idea that it's acceptable, let alone legal, for government agents to fry suspects is abhorrent to me.


This ^^^. Defending against direct/immediate attacks is one thing. Roasting people alive is another thing entirely.

Vigilantism & lynch-mobbery is unacceptable - especially coming from a group (cops) whose reason for existence is (allegedly) to obviate the "need" for vigilantes & lynch mobs.

I find it ridiculous that this even needs to be said - especially at a place like Ron Paul Forums. Apparently, it does, though ...

----------


## S.Shorland

Police:Burn This MotherF#cker

----------


## shane77m

I have read a lot of comments where people support what the police done. "Hey, screw due process and screw that rag the Constitution" is basically what they are saying.

----------


## SewrRatt

Silly me, I was under the impression that police all over the country needed those armored tanks they've been getting for exactly situations like this. Clearly they must be for something else, since standoffs are going to be resolved by burning the buildings down from now on.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> I have read a lot of comments where people support what the police done. "Hey, screw due process and screw that rag the Constitution" is basically what they are saying.


SRSL????

UGH!

-t

----------


## pcosmar

> Police:Burn This MotherF#cker


That video had 305 views last night right after it was posted.

This morning I look again and it has 305 views.

I have a doubt.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> That video had 305 views last night right after it was posted.
> 
> This morning I look again and it has 305 views.
> 
> I have a doubt.


It's a YouTube "Big" or "feature"...

Normally it's 302...

-t
.

----------


## presence

> So has anyone yet mentioned that the cabin was someone's property they decided to destroy?

----------


## phill4paul

> So what should the police have done in this situation?  Order him a pizza give him some grape soda to come out?



   Usually, it is called a "negotiation." Family, his mother, would be brought in to plead for his surrender. I remember not long back a story of a man that armed and barricaded himself in an apartment he was being evicted from. The sheriffs department pulled all the troops back. Even ordered up some McD's for him. He ended up surrendering. At least there should be an effort.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

Innocent until crispy

----------


## shane77m

> 


must spread some rep around

----------


## pcosmar

> Innocent until crispy


And whoever killed the first victims gets away,,no further investigation. Hang it on the dead guy.

Case Closed.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Innocent until crispy


You nust spread some rep around before....

-t

----------


## shane77m

Wouldn't due process be negated by Dorner being labeled a domestic terrorist?

----------


## S.Shorland

He was on the Presidential grill list



> Wouldn't due process be negated by Dorner being labeled a domestic terrorist?

----------


## Uncle Emanuel Watkins

> Wouldn't due process be negated by Dorner being labeled a domestic terrorist?


The definition of organized crime as apposed to regular crime is that the first kind incorporates members of the government.  Take what is going on in northern Mexico to use as an example.  In order to stop the present war that is going on, the Mexican government has sided with one gang cartel to go up against another.  So, tyranny is actually the whole corporation of what one normally considers to be the government along with elements of organized crime.  In a tyranny, they stop bothering to differentiate between what is government and what is organized crime.  This is how it was in the old days.  
Likewise, in their fighting against you as a concerned citizen, they utilize the soviet styled media corporations to label you as a criminal.  This is why we need dogs.  In our fight against the cowards hiding behind a wall of tyranny, we are going to need crazy dogs willing to fight against an organized crime that will cut heads off.  By crazy dogs, I mean those pack dogs willing to advance the weaker dogs towards the meat of the foe, or the cowards entrenched behind a wall of rather big men.

----------


## jmdrake

> So what should the police have done in this situation?  Order him a pizza give him some grape soda to come out?


And that would be a bad solution because.....?

----------


## squarepusher

> The "police" should have backed the $#@! up and chilled out.
> 
> If what was portrayed on "The-Newz" was even close to reality there is absolutely no moral justification to cook a man.
> 
> This isn't Salem Mass.1692 for heavens sake....
> 
> This idea that it's acceptable, let alone legal, for government agents to fry suspects is abhorrent to me.


OK, with a high profile case like this, everything is under a microscope, under what authorization did they decide to cook the man?  Someone from the top had to call out the decision and will have to own up to it.

----------


## Lucille

> So much for innocent until proven guilty and that messy due process $#@!.







> When I was watching CNN earlier they had a brief crawl across the screen where *the U.S. Marshalls on the scene told reporters that someone tried to escape through the back door but they shoved the person back inside the burning cabin*. So instead of taking advantage of someone who could be subdued and arrested to be charged and stand trial, the federal agents decided to act as judge, jury and executioner and push someone that they *thought* was the suspect back into a burning building to be killed.


I read that here last night and was hoping it was a prank.  That is f'n appalling.  You'd think that inhumanity would be something that they'd want kept quiet, but a Marshall admits that to reporters?  They didn't "burn him out."  They burned him alive.




> So has anyone yet mentioned that the cabin was someone's property they decided to destroy?
> 
> Maybe they'll buy him a truck.


I also read here insurance policies don't cover government destruction.




> Silly me, I was under the impression that police all over the country needed those armored tanks they've been getting for exactly situations like this. Clearly they must be for something else, since standoffs are going to be resolved by burning the buildings down from now on.


Yeah, what about that anyhow?

"What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it?"
--Madeleine Albright

The government could take a lot of people alive.  They'd just rather not.  Too much trouble, I guess.

What still kills me about this whole thing is how they pulled out all the stops to get this guy, but when a mundane gets killed, the cops are all, "Meh."  They pretty much proved his point about how they see the public they allegedly are there to serve and protect:




> Dont honor these fallen officers/dirtbags. When your family members die, they just see you as extra overtime at a crime scene and at a perimeter. Why would you value their lives when they clearly dont value yours or your family members lives? Ive heard many officers who state they see dead victims as ATVs, Waverunners, RVs and new clothes for their kids. Why would you shed a tear for them when they in return crack a smile for your loss because of the impending extra money they will receive in their next paycheck for sitting at your loved ones crime scene of 6 hours because of the overtime they will accrue. They take photos of your loved ones recently deceased bodies with their cellphones and play a game of who has the most graphic dead body of the night with officers from other divisions. This isnt just the 20 something year old officers, this is the 50 year old officers with significant time on the job as well who participate.





> Did anyone seriously think that the cops would allow LAPD critic Chris Dorner to live long enough to stand trial for his admittedly reprehensible violent acts, which nonetheless carried the possibility of seriously embarrassing the Los Angeles Police Department? Of course not.
> 
> Latino newspaper delivery workers in the area are shot even though they bear no resemblance to the accused. Others are shot. Victims throughout Los Angeles County could only pray for such a police response to the violence they must live with on a daily basis, mostly thanks to the drug war. But they are only the taxpayers, they do not count.
> [...]
> It is hard to cry too heartily over the death of a government-trained killer who has "gone rogue," but is anyone else as chilled as I am about reports that drones have been darkening California skies looking for this killer when thousands of murders go unsolved and unmanned yearly?

----------


## BSU kid

They should burn down all of Los Angeles while they are at it, burn all the gangbangers to a crisp at any cost.

----------


## AuH20

Do you risk police lives for due process, which basically amounts to an open and shut case??? No. However, do you burn Dorner alive without exploring other alternatives?
No.

----------


## AuH20

> Wouldn't due process be negated by Dorner being labeled a domestic terrorist?


It has more to do with the potential cost of lives trying to subdue him, when he made it abundantly clear he wanted no participation in the justice system.

----------


## 2young2vote

This is what I wrote on the youtube video.  Lets see how the big government nazis respond:

" the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed"

Dorner is a murderer, but the US Constitution applies to his situation.  Those who advocate ignoring the 6th amendment are traitors, no better than President Obama.

----------


## phill4paul

> OK, with a high profile case like this, everything is under a microscope, under what authorization did they decide to cook the man?  Someone from the top had to call out the decision and will have to own up to it.


  And without any independent inquiries it will go........

  "Policies were followed. We regret that it had to end this way. Blah, blah, blah. Case closed."

  If I'm not mistaken a lot of promotions came after Waco.

----------


## pcosmar

> They should burn down all of Los Angeles while they are at it, burn all the gangbangers to a crisp at any cost.


I seriously hope that was sarcasm,,but I am having a hard time telling.


.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Do you risk police lives for due process, which basically amounts to an open and shut case???   No.


 Excuse me?  Yes you do.  Obviously you do.  Have we really come to this?  You've been indoctrinated and brainwashed into the "new normalcy" by watching too much COPS, 24, Law and Order, and other ongoing manifestos against all decency and civilization.

People who do _not_ risk their lives for due process are not legitimate peace officers.  They're just thugs and vigilantes.  Systems which simply kill people when it's an "open and shut case" are not legal systems, they're just violence systems.

Come back from the dark side, Au20.  Stop your love for authoritarianism.  This was a crime.  Committed by criminals.  With badges.  Against a criminal.  With a badge.  That is all.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

From what I have read in comments and other sites they created a martyr when the burned him to death

----------


## pcosmar

> Against a criminal.  With a badge.  That is all.


That is still unproven. And is in fact highly questionable. This started with him going against the system and standing up AGAINST abuse..

If anything this whole event was another exercise in conditioning the masses.

----------


## AuH20

> Excuse me?  Yes you do.  Obviously you do.  Have we really come to this?  You've been indoctrinated and brainwashed into the "new normalcy" by watching too much COPS, 24, Law and Order, and other ongoing manifestos against all decency and civilization.
> 
> People who do _not_ risk their lives for due process are not legitimate peace officers.  They're just thugs and vigilantes.  Systems which simply kill people when it's an "open and shut case" are not legal systems, they're just violence systems.
> 
> Come back from the dark side, Au20.  Stop your love for authoritarianism.  This was a crime.  Committed by criminals.  With badges.  Against a criminal.  With a badge.  That is all.


I have no love for the police or authoritarianism, but place yourself in the shoes of the SWAT team. In fact, I've been banned from many gun forums for attacking police malfeasance, most notably the Adrian Schoolcraft incident. But this ludicrous notion that we must grant due process at the risk of possibly a few lives is completely irrational from my point-of-view. Every libertrarian who advocates for this perverse exercise in futility in relation to this highly unusual case should have taken a flight to San Bernandino and removed Dorner themselves. I'm sorry but that's how I feel. 'Due process' doesn't mean that you send several men into a meat grinder to capture someone who made it clear that he wanted to take as many LE down with him.

----------


## phill4paul

> I have no love for the police or authoritarianism, but place yourself in the shoes of the SWAT team. In fact, I've been banned from many gun forums for attacking police malfeasance, most notably the Adrian Schoolcraft incident. But this ludicrous notion that we must grant due process at the risk of possibly a few lives is completely irrational from my point-of-view. Every libertrarian who advocates for this perverse exercise in futility in relation to this highly unusual case should have taken a flight to San Bernandino and removed Dorner themselves. I'm sorry but that's how I feel. 'Due process' doesn't mean that you send several men into a meat grinder to capture someone who made it clear that he wanted to take as many LE down with them.


  No one HAD to enter a "meat grinder." They had him pinned down. The next step should have been negotiation.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.


So what happened to habeas corpus, the right to a trial?  Do you not believe in that stuff because of emotional appeal now?

----------


## pcosmar

> to capture someone who made it clear that he wanted to take as many LE down with him.


Allegedly,,according to a highly questionable "manifesto" of unknown origin.
However the facts show that he was NOT actively hunting anyone.. but was hiding and evading those that hunted him,, and only fired on those immediately hostile to him.

Bull$#@! story does not hold water.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> They should burn down all of Los Angeles while they are at it, burn all the gangbangers to a crisp at any cost.


But make sure all the cops get out first.  We wouldn't want to harm any cops in the process of slaughtering millions.  God bless law enforcement.

/s

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> That is still unproven. And is in fact highly questionable. This started with him going against the system and standing up AGAINST abuse..
> 
> If anything this whole event was another exercise in conditioning the masses.


 OK, I'm not familiar with this story, so I will defer to you.  And it does sound like at minimum it's in question whether he was the only one in that cabin.  So it was a crime committed by criminals with badges, against one or more people in a cabin about whom we know little, and probably never will.

----------


## Dr.3D

Waco all over again.

----------


## pcosmar

> Waco all over again.


There was some pretty extensive cover up back then too.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

Cnn just had a ex-FBI person on very upset at how this was handled

----------


## Tax the Fed

> Burning the structure down that quickly struck me as very unusual.


will there be any positive forensic evidence like dental records or DNA tissue in the ashes to confirm it was Dorner that was charbroiled ?

----------


## Uncle Emanuel Watkins

> will there be any positive forensic evidence like dental records or DNA tissue in the ashes to confirm it was Dorner that was charbroiled ?


Yes.  It takes a much higher temperature to totally incinerate a body to ashes.

----------


## Dr.3D

> There was some pretty extensive cover up back then too.


And what better way to cover up evidence than to burn it completely?

We know very little about what this man may have done, and now it will never be revealed in court.  As far as we know, he didn't do anything wrong but attempt to uncover the truth behind the corruption he discovered in the job he was performing.   Those who would have been exposed are now happy this will never go to court.

----------


## Dark_Horse_Rider

> Excuse me?  Yes you do.  Obviously you do.  Have we really come to this?  You've been indoctrinated and brainwashed into the "new normalcy" by watching too much COPS, 24, Law and Order, and other ongoing manifestos against all decency and civilization.
> 
> People who do _not_ risk their lives for due process are not legitimate peace officers.  They're just thugs and vigilantes.  Systems which simply kill people when it's an "open and shut case" are not legal systems, they're just violence systems.
> 
> Come back from the dark side, Au20.  Stop your love for authoritarianism.  This was a crime.  Committed by criminals.  With badges.


this 

and those who wake up from their slumber will know that the media is complicit in this with the state

----------


## Dark_Horse_Rider

> So what happened to habeas corpus, the right to a trial?  Do you not believe in that stuff because of emotional appeal now?


that( HC ) went with paytrit act

----------


## AFPVet

Let's say for entertainment purposes that this guy they 'allegedly burned (no pun intended)' was an innocent whistle blower who was framed and running/fighting for his life? Far fetched? Many people to this day believe the official story on 9/11. I am not saying this was a psy-op, but I am trying to open the window shades in order to entertain the thought that... what if...?

You can't always believe the corporate media and immediately throw the switch when you don't know the full or real story. There are two sides to every story. This is why we have due process and trials. If someone breaks into your home, that is an active situation; however, if someone told you to light that same person up before he broke into your home because someone told you that he was... would you?

----------


## Bruno

My only surprise is that they did not drone strike him.  They went in Waco-style as soon ad they possibly could.

----------


## shane77m



----------


## Lucille

> [Updated at 9:14 p.m. ET] Earlier, we reported that U.S. Marshals Service district chief Kurt Ellingson told us a suspect tried to get out the back door of the cabin at some point today and was pushed back inside. But there are now conflicting reports about whether the suspect ever emerged.
> 
> Ellingson says authorities are not sure whether the suspect came out.


Does anyone buy that?  I kind of doubt a Marshall would tell reporters a rumor like that.

----------


## fr33

Rush Limbaugh is even griping a little about the burning. He said "where's Janet Reno?"

----------


## SewrRatt

The people defending the cops in this thread have a serious case of false dilemma-itis. To hear them tell it, there were two and only two possible options. 1: Burn the cabin to the ground, regardless of who or what may be in it. 2: Approach the cabin with no negotiation, no police armored siege vehicle, no ballistic armor, no guns, no flashbangs, no SWAT tactics, backs turned and handcuffed.

----------


## dannno

> Its useless to argue with you. Jesus could come down from heaven and tell you the sky is blue, you would call him an agent provocateur and say it was a government conspiracy to keep us from realizing the sky is green.


So you are comparing the LAPD and mainstream media to Jesus? Wow, you're way more off than anybody else here. 

Listen to what he said. We only know that Dorner was violent when defending himself. We have no proof that he killed innocent people, that is what the trial was supposed to be for. So every time the cops engaged him, from what we have seen they tried to kill him on spot. So he defended himself. What part of this is so difficult for you to understand?

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I read elsewhere that a "burner" is a tear gas grenade, but I have not verified if that is true.
> 
> Also, for those who keep saying the "LAPD would not let him get out alive", the cops involved here are from the San Bernadino county sheriffs dept. Big Bear Lake is 100 miles from LA.


Post #138

Also, it is not simply that the 'LAPD would not let him get out alive.' That man could have been in Colorado and they still would have summarily executed him. Boys in blue and all that. (Look back through history, namely, John Dillinger, Bonnie and Clybe, Pretty Boy Floyd etc.) They had no interest in taking him alive, not that he was interested in being taking alive. That does not mean you arbitrarily light the cabin on fire.

----------


## jj-

> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


Wait him out.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

Remember the context that last week LAPD shot 2 women, and another truck that only resembled the suspects by being a truck.

They never intended to let him live to tell his story.

There was an obvious "kill order" from day one.

----------


## jj-

> are you talking about where they shot at the wrong people? obliviously that is $#@!ed, but that is a separate incident, separate cops.


but with the same instructions.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> Excuse me?  Yes you do.  Obviously you do.  Have we really come to this?  You've been indoctrinated and brainwashed into the "new normalcy" by watching too much COPS, 24, Law and Order, and other ongoing manifestos against all decency and civilization.
> 
> *People who do not risk their lives for due process are not legitimate peace officers.  They're just thugs and vigilantes.  Systems which simply kill people when it's an "open and shut case" are not legal systems, they're just violence systems.*
> 
> Come back from the dark side, Au20.  Stop your love for authoritarianism.  *This was a crime.  Committed by criminals.  With badges.  Against a criminal.  With a badge.  That is all.*


Reading this thread and I can't keep up with the rep. Excellent posts.

----------


## jj-

> I find it ridiculous that this even needs to be said - especially at a place like Ron Paul Forums. Apparently, it does, though ...


yeah, we have also apologists for the state here.

----------


## jj-

> OK, with a high profile case like this, everything is under a microscope, under what authorization did they decide to cook the man?  Someone from the top had to call out the decision and will have to own up to it.


Nothing will happen. Police abuse or misconduct typically results in getting a paid vacation.

----------


## pcosmar

> Nothing will happen. Police abuse or misconduct typically results in getting a paid vacation.


Or a promotion.

*The Enforcer*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Noble



> From 1993 until 1996 he was the Undersecretary for Enforcement of the United States Department of the Treasury, where he was in charge of the United States Secret Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.[1] He was head of the Department's *"Waco Administrative Review Team"* which produced a report on the ATF's actions against the Branch Davidians leading to the Waco Siege

----------


## thehungarian

...

----------


## TywinLannister

> No one HAD to enter a "meat grinder." They had him pinned down. The next step should have been negotiation.


He had just killed a cop. He was shooting at them, and throwing smoke grenades at them to try to escape the cabin. If he had gotten away he could have killed even more people.

----------


## dannno

> He had just killed a cop. He was shooting at them, and throwing smoke grenades at them to try to escape the cabin. If he had gotten away he could have killed even more people.


Do you have *any* evidence that what he was doing wasn't 100% self defense?

----------


## CaptainAmerica

> Why do people keep saying there were potential hostages? Isn't it possible the cops had definitive confirmation there were no hostages?
> 
> What do you guys think would have been a better way to handle the situation?  Honestly curious here from a tactical logistics standpoint.


standing down would be the best thing to do and try to calm down Dorner and negotiate. Yes negotiate, that word that america has forgotten because its so full of pride and arrogance and willing to kill eachother before actually talking anything out.Oh well, swat teams will be regarded as heros for charring a man .they are no better than him

----------


## CaptainAmerica

> Personally if it were me torching the place is probably exactly what I would do, from a strategic standpoint. The guy obviously is not going to surrender, keeps killing people. He needed to be put down like a rabid wolf. He has no respect for life and nothing to lose. Sorry but this man needed to be killed, period. I'm not saying that makes the police good. But if I was defending myself and my property from this man, I would take steps to eliminate him with no mercy.


 and does anyone bother to ask why he did what he did?What pushed him over the edge?

----------


## TywinLannister

> Do you have *any* evidence that what he was doing wasn't 100% self defense?


Self defense? Was kidnapping and holding hostage two people a form of self defense?

----------


## TywinLannister

> and does anyone bother to ask why he did what he did?What pushed him over the edge?


If someone is threatening your life are you going to take the time to ask, or are you going to defend yourself?

----------


## sailingaway

> He had just killed a cop. He was shooting at them, and throwing smoke grenades at them to try to escape the cabin. If he had gotten away he could have killed even more people.


No one was shooting at that point in time.

You aren't allowed to burn someone alive because you think they are guilty and you are afraid they might get away.  There have certainly been stakeouts that were prolonged, and long term negotiations talked someone out when there was someone there they felt safe surrendering to.

----------


## squarepusher

> And without any independent inquiries it will go........
> 
>   "Policies were followed. We regret that it had to end this way. Blah, blah, blah. Case closed."
> 
>   If I'm not mistaken a lot of promotions came after Waco.





> Do you have *any* evidence that what he was doing wasn't 100% self defense?


yes, if he was being unfairly hunted, and framed, he contact an attorney and arrange for safe surrender and fair trial.  According to his manifesto his intentions were pretty clear however, and his actions match up with it so I believe it was valid.





> and does anyone bother to ask why he did what he did?What pushed him over the edge?


I think he said so himself, he thought he was fired and railroaded  by the LAPD for filing an excessive force complaint against his training  officer.

----------


## sailingaway

> yes, if he was being unfairly hunted, and framed, he contact an attorney and arrange for safe surrender and fair trial.  According to his manifesto his intentions were pretty clear however, and his actions match up with it so I believe it was valid.


But in absence of a hot firefight, he should have a trial to say HIS side.

Maybe he would have surrendered once cornered, if he had someone he felt it safe to surrender to to take him into custody.

Maybe not, but due process exists for a reason, and burning someone alive is terrible.

----------


## green73

LA Times confirms

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-on-cabin.html

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

TURN IT UP LOUD




MAKE NEIGHBORS :-)

----------


## sailingaway

> LA Times confirms
> 
> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-on-cabin.html


Am I misremembering that there was no shooting going on then? What I'm remembering was there was this long period of nothing happening, then it started to get near time for it to get dark and there was this stuff about 'burners'.

----------


## sailingaway

Here, I couldn't find this thread so I posted another story on it here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...e-Suspect-quot

----------


## green73

> Am I misremembering that there was no shooting going on then? What I'm remembering was there was this long period of nothing happening, then it started to get near time for it to get dark and there was this stuff about 'burners'.



I don't think there was any shooting after he was holed up.

----------


## squarepusher

> LA Times confirms
> 
> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-on-cabin.html


If it was Incendiary tear gas, it looks like whatever agency was taking play books straight out of WACO, which reeks of Federal supervision.  At this point I'm not sure which agency was in charge of the investigation, but it may have been the FBI/DHS?

Sounds like they were calling the shots and had no qualms about this execution and they had a reason.  I am interested to hear what the reason may be, but it may be that they thought there was no way to take this suspect alive safely.  Remember back in the day they used to have "Wanted: Dead Or Alive" posters?  Our government has had these policies for a very long time, centuries.

----------


## TywinLannister

> *Faced with regular barrages of gunfire*, officers confronting suspected killer Christopher Dorner lobbed incendiary tear gas into the cabin where Dorner allegedly was holed up, said law enforcement officials with knowledge of the situation.





> *Law enforcement sources said the officers got into several gun battles with Dorner during a nearly four-hour siege at the cabin in the Big Bear area. The standoff began when Dorner allegedly fatally shot a San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputy and seriously injured another.*






> *SWAT officers surrounding the cabin were under a "constant barrage of gunfire,"* one source said. “He put himself in that position. There weren’t a lot of options.”
> 
> Hoping to end the standoff, *law enforcement authorities first lobbed "traditional" tear gas into the cabin. When that did not work, they opted to use CS gas canisters, which are known in law enforcement parlance as incendiary tear gas.* These canisters have significantly more chance of starting a fire. This gas can cause humans to have burning eyes and start to feel as if they are being starved for oxygen. It is often used to drive barricaded individuals out.






> Just before 5 p.m., authorities smashed the cabin's windows, pumped in tear gas and *called for the suspect to surrender*, officials said. *They got no response.* *Then, using a demolition vehicle, they tore down the cabin's walls one by one.* When they reached the last wall, they heard a gunshot. Then the cabin burst into flames, officials said.







> A short time later, authorities said, the suspect carjacked a light-colored pickup truck. Allan Laframboise said the truck belonged to his friend Rick Heltebrake, who works at a nearby Boy Scout camp.
> 
> Heltebrake was driving on Glass Road with his Dalmatian, Suni, when a hulking African American man stepped into the road, Laframboise said. Heltebrake stopped. The man told him to get out of the truck.
> 
> 
> 
> As the suspect zoomed past the officers, *he rolled down his window and fired about 15 to 20 rounds,* officials said. One of the officers jumped out and shot a high-powered rifle at the fleeing pickup. The suspect abandoned the vehicle and took off on foot, police said.
> 
> They said he ended up at the Seven Oaks Mountain Cabins, a cluster of wood-frame buildings about halfway between Big Bear Lake and Yucaipa. *The suspect exchanged gunfire with San Bernardino County sheriff's deputies as he fled into a cabin* that locals described as a single-story, multi-room structure.
> ...


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-on-cabin.html

----------


## sailingaway

> If it was Incendiary tear gas, it looks like whatever agency was taking play books straight out of WACO, which reeks of Federal supervision.  At this point I'm not sure which agency was in charge of the investigation, but it may have been the FBI/DHS?
> 
> Sounds like they were calling the shots and had no qualms about this execution and they had a reason.  I am interested to hear what the reason may be, but it may be that they thought there was no way to take this suspect alive safely.  Remember back in the day they used to have "Wanted: Dead Or Alive" posters?  Our government has had these policies for a very long time, centuries.


The dead usually implied firefights, and not law officers burning someone alive in cold blood, if I'm remembering my Louis L'Amour properly.

----------


## sailingaway

> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-on-cabin.html


and hours later they decided to burn him alive?

----------


## Lucille

I want to hear more about someone pushing Dorner back into the burning cabin after he tried to get out the back door.  They're trying to walk back that statement by the Marshal, claiming "conflicting reports," but that just convinces me it happened and they're trying to cover it up.




> [Updated at 8:34 p.m. ET] At some point today, a suspect tried to get out the back door of the cabin, but he was pushed back inside, U.S. Marshals Service district chief Kurt Ellingson told CNN's Brian Todd.
> 
> [Updated at 9:14 p.m. ET] Earlier, we reported that U.S. Marshals Service district chief Kurt Ellingson told us a suspect tried to get out the back door of the cabin at some point today and was pushed back inside. But there are now conflicting reports about whether the suspect ever emerged.
> 
> Ellingson says authorities are not sure whether the suspect came out.

----------


## TywinLannister

> and hours later they decided to burn him alive?


They tried using regular tear gas before they used incendiary tear gas, and it didn't work.

----------


## sailingaway

> They tried using regular tear gas before they used incendiary tear gas, and it didn't work.


He didn't come out so they decided to burn him alive?

----------


## Dr.3D

Why not just let him get hungry and come out on his own?    

Of course we have to guess the real reason he was killed.   They didn't want him to tell his story in a court of law.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

> They tried using regular tear gas before they used incendiary tear gas, and it didn't work.


Bull$#@! I was listening to the police scanner feed. They almost immediately said "burn it down" and "like we planned"

This was murder.

----------


## green73

> I want to hear more about someone pushing Dorner back into the burning cabin after he tried to get out the back door.  They're trying to walk back that statement by the Marshal, claiming "conflicting reports," but that just convinces me it happened and they're trying to cover it up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				[Updated at 8:34 p.m. ET] At some point today, a suspect tried to get out the back door of the cabin, but he was pushed back inside, U.S. Marshals Service district chief Kurt Ellingson told CNN's Brian Todd.
> 
> ...


W
T
F

----------


## TywinLannister

> He didn't come out so they decided to burn him alive?


They didn't "decide to burn him alive." They used grenades they knew could possibly cause a fire, after trying other options.

----------


## green73

> They didn't "decide to burn him alive." They used grenades they knew could possibly cause a fire, after trying other options.


I guess you didn't hear the audio recordings.

----------


## awake



----------


## sailingaway

> W
> T
> F


Yeah, I saw a comment on that on twitter at the time, too.  A LOT of people were watching the live streams. What do you bet it is the live stream availability where the focus of concern focuses?

----------


## AGRP

> I guess you didn't hear the audio recordings.


There's been at least 2 occasions in which the troll admitted it did not listen to the video and it still refuses to.  The troll will go away as soon as its ignored.

----------


## phill4paul

> He had just killed a cop. He was shooting at them, and throwing smoke grenades at them to try to escape the cabin. If he had gotten away he could have killed even more people.


  What part of 'pinned down' didn't you understand.

----------


## Dr.3D

> What part of 'pinned down' didn't you understand.


Not to mention, the fact he is considered innocent of everything till proven guilty in a court of law.
This means, he didn't kill anybody!  We can not just declare someone killed somebody and pronounce them guilty of the crime, without taking them to trial first.

----------


## squarepusher

> Why not just let him get hungry and come out on his own?    
> 
> Of course we have to guess the real reason he was killed.   They didn't want him to tell his story in a court of law.


I believe you are misthinking the LEO point of view.  They were avenging their brothers who had fallen,  and taking their own revenge for slain officers.  They were eager to use fire bombs since they didn't want this scum to see a trial, in their point of view.  I think only a very few at the top of the excessive force case want that information hidden, and all the info is already out in the manifesto.  Dorner left everything he wanted the world to know already last week, I don't think much new could come from a trial, or the LAPD is 'covering anything up' by killing him.  The coverup is legal technicalities for an excessive force complaint, hardly worthy of killing someone over to 'silence.'




> Yeah, I saw a comment on that on twitter at the time, too.  A LOT of people were watching the live streams. What do you bet it is the live stream availability where the focus of concern focuses?


I doubt any officer would get that near to the cabin to 'shove' a suspect back in, because that would mean they would be putting themselves in firing range of Dorner by approaching the cabin.





> Not to mention, the fact he is considered innocent of everything till proven guilty in a court of law.
> This means, he didn't kill anybody!  We can not just declare someone  killed somebody and pronounce them guilty of the crime, without taking  them to trial first.


You are missing the point, he was a threat to the officers and  probably wouldn't be taken alive.  Most likely they will use the  technicality that they were acting in self defense or to prevent further  officer death (already 2 officers dead, and 5 shot? at this point) even though its usually used in a more direct immediate manner.  It  would be the same argument if a suspect pulled a gun on an officer or  pointed a gun.  Dorner I believe even said in his own manifesto he would  not be taken alive, or something to that extent.





> Not to mention, the fact he is considered innocent of everything till proven guilty in a court of law.
> This means, he didn't kill anybody!  We can not just declare someone  killed somebody and pronounce them guilty of the crime, without taking  them to trial first.



Well, let me ask you this, isn't the government agency innocent as well until proven guilty?  I am assuming you think the officers at the cabin are guilty in the 'execution' of Dorner in the fire, as well as the committees committing fraud in excessive force case 'trial' which is Dorners main complaint on why the department is corrupt.  So why don't we wait for the trial to see if the agencies were at fault?  Well I know you don't think is true, I was trying to point out a flaw in your reasoning that you only want a trial for your suspect to prove his guilt, but assume the officers are guilty and LAPD on your own accord without trial.

----------


## phill4paul

> I doubt any officer would get that near to the cabin to 'shove' a suspect back in, because that would mean they would be putting themselves in firing range of Dorner by approaching the cabin.


  My thoughts are that "push him back in" probably means firing rounds to make him retreat. I don't think it was meant as physically doing so.

----------


## Dr.3D

> Snip
>   Dorner I believe even said in his own manifesto he would  not be taken alive, or something to that extent.


We don't know he even wrote a "manifesto".




> Well, let me ask you this, isn't the government agency innocent as well until proven guilty?  I am assuming you think the government agency is guilty of not only foul play in the excessive force case, but also in the 'execution' of Dorner in the fire.  So why don't we wait for the trial to see if the agencies were at fault?  Well I know you don't think is true, I was trying to point out a flaw in your reasoning.


They have not been accused of any crime that I know of.  The reason we won't wait for a trial is because there won't be one.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> They tried using regular tear gas before they used incendiary tear gas, and it didn't work.




Pretty convenient. I should keep this bear facepalm copied at all times.

----------


## squarepusher

> We don't know he even wrote a "manifesto".
> 
> 
> They have not been accused of any crime that I know of.  The reason we won't wait for a trial is because there won't be one.


So who wrote the manifesto, and what purpose would they have for doing so, if not Dorner?
Did Dorner shoot at and kill officers yesterday, several days ago, and Quan's daughter and fiance?

----------


## pcosmar

> So who wrote the manifesto, and what purpose would they have for doing so, if not Dorner?
> Did Dorner shoot at and kill officers yesterday, several days ago, and Quan's daughter and fiance?


That is the allegation/accusation,, however no proof has been provided.

I believe that he very well could have returned fire when fired upon.. but as to the first murder of the Daughter and Boyfriend ,, who knows.

----------


## squarepusher

This is what may have happened at the Dorner cabin

----------


## satchelmcqueen

funny how the media once again helped try to cover this up with a media blackout. im glad this scanner tape was released. $#@!ing murderers. at least dorner had a reason to do what he did. they $#@!ed him over for trying to turn in bad corrupt cops. im sorry but dorner is a hero imo. the "good cops" in this tape as portrayed by the lying media, just violated every law there was and tried to hide it.

----------


## satchelmcqueen

winner!!!!


> Why not just let him get hungry and come out on his own?    
> 
> Of course we have to guess the real reason he was killed.   They didn't want him to tell his story in a court of law.

----------


## squarepusher

http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html

*Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*

----------


## AuH20

> http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html
> 
> *Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*


Sounds like damage control, when the radio feed confirms otherwise.

----------


## squarepusher

> Sounds like damage control, when the radio feed confirms otherwise.


I don't know how they can get away with this, with plenty of evidence on radio records pretty clearly stating 'burn it' lol.

----------


## acptulsa

> http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html
> 
> *Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*


Maa-aaa-aa!  Yahoo's insulting my intelligence _again!!_  Make him stop!

----------


## fr33

> http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html
> 
> *Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*


I heard with my own ears the police officer saying he wanted to make sure it burns down into the basement.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

> http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html
> 
> *Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*


I guess "burn the $#@!er down" is police code for something else.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Not to mention, the fact he is considered innocent of everything till proven guilty in a court of law.
> This means, he didn't kill anybody!  We can not just declare someone killed somebody and pronounce them guilty of the crime, without taking them to trial first.


But, but, but... he was a tteeeaaaarrooaarrist!

Some bureaucrat said so!

-t

----------


## AGRP

> I heard with my own ears the police officer saying he wanted to make sure it burns down into the basement.


What are you going to believe? Your own ears or yahoo news?

----------


## AuH20

> I don't know how they can get away with this, with plenty of evidence on radio records pretty clearly stating 'burn it' lol.


Sounds like someone who doesn't want retribution coming their way.

----------


## CT4Liberty

Haven't read through the entire thread... but how can anyone justify burning someone alive in a cabin?!

Wouldnt smoke or stun grenades or tear gas but a much more humane way of "smoking him out".

----------


## TheTexan

> Haven't read through the entire thread... but how can anyone justify burning someone alive in a cabin?!


The fact that it was done by cops is usually justification enough

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

Anyone question that the police aren't mob enforcers? No..ok then. Case closed. What a terrible group of thugs.

----------


## Tyler_Durden

> http://news.yahoo.com/sheriff-cabin-...003121793.html
> 
> *Sheriff: Cabin not purposely burned in firefight*



Is this the Sheriff?

----------


## jclay2

> I heard with my own ears the police officer saying he wanted to make sure it burns down into the basement.


Terrorist!!!!! Conspiracy Theorists!

----------


## AGRP

They must be happy about all the overtime theyre getting to create multiple fairy tales.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> Am I misremembering that there was no shooting going on then? What I'm remembering was there was this long period of nothing happening, then it started to get near time for it to get dark and there was this stuff about 'burners'.


The director told the SFX crew it would be most dramatic at that time of day.  Choreography is everything.  Well that and sir golfs-a-lot was about to come on.  Couldn't step on that...



-t

----------


## MelissaCato

Was the body confirmed to be Dorner yet ?

----------


## fr33

> Maybe someone can provide a transcript before this vid disappears.
> 
> 1:28 Cops: burners deployed and we do have a fire.


I just want to point out that the video left out a very important part. Right at the end the officer says "I'm told that there is a basement in this cabin". Then the video ends.

I was listening and after that the female operator gave him the dimensions of the basement. The officer asked whether it was concrete. And I *think* she replied saying the floor of the cabin is the basement's ceiling.

After that, the officer says that they want to make sure that the fire burns down to the basement. 

I sure wish someone had a recording of that part.

----------


## shane77m

> I just want to point out that the video left out a very important part. Right at the end the officer says "I'm told that there is a basement in this cabin". Then the video ends.
> 
> I was listening and after that the female operator gave him the dimensions of the basement. The officer asked whether it was concrete. And I *think* she replied saying the floor of the cabin is the basement's ceiling.
> 
> After that, the officer says that they want to make sure that the fire burns down to the basement. 
> 
> I sure wish someone had a recording of that part.


I remember hearing that on the scanner. They had to ask a couple of times to find out what the floor/basement ceiling was made of. They wanted to know if it was wood or concrete.

----------


## sailingaway

> I heard with my own ears the police officer saying he wanted to make sure it burns down into the basement.


I remember. I said there aren't many basements in California.  But it turned out this one had one.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

Yeah, well, even while all this discussion is illuminating, I'm going to wait until the made-for-tv reenactments and MSNBC documentary to make up my mind about what happened.  'MERICA $#@! YEAH  

So, this is what state-sanctioned murder looks like, huh?  Sigh...to all you idiots in this thread, you few mental incompetents that can't see the Dorner situation as what it is: one day, YOU may be Chris Dorner.  The State may decide that YOU are a threat to society, a bringer of doom and terror, and you too may be summarily executed.  Does this comment endorse Dorner as an innocent?  No.  Nor does this comment claim he was guilty.  That was to be the duty of 12 strangers.  They were to decide his lot.  

I get pissed at red lights all the time; I don't crash my car into the pole, or climb up a ladder to rip the motherfuckers down, nor do I plink the bastards with a BB gun.  Dorner could well have achieved his desired result by going to the national media, or the international media.  People do funny things when they're angry, don't they?  Sometimes, they even incinerate a fellow human being, when their responsibility is to bring folks to justice - not to BE justice.  

I hope the backlash against the LAPD is as thorough as a TSA anal cavity search, and very, very heavily publicized.  $#@!ing dicks.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

Oh, $#@!, I almost forgot to mention:

LAPD = Christopher Dorner

Marinate on that for a few minutes, bitches.  

Same methodology.  Yet, there was "Justice" for Dorner - while I'll lay odds that whoever chucked that incendiary device will get a $#@!ing commendation.  The LA Times will stroke the LAPD's cock, and Liberty will have it dribbling down her chin.  Or do I mean all of _us? _ ​I dunno.  God bless America.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

OK, I'll shut up after this post.  For the lulz!

----------


## TheTexan



----------


## presence

So this morning we find out that "*dorner tied up two women from a cleaning crew*" is another media* fabrication.*

It was husband and wife; owners, cleaning up the place for rental.

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> So this morning we find out that "*dorner tied up two women from a cleaning crew*" is another media* fabrication.*
> 
> It was husband and wife; owners, cleaning up the place for rental.


Linkie?

-t

----------


## moostraks

> I don't know how they can get away with this, with plenty of evidence on radio records pretty clearly stating 'burn it' lol.


Ya know, I think they don't care that we have evidence of their burning it down. All that matters is that the media claims for the majority of society to hear that it was not intentional. How many people will actually care to listen and then choose to change their position on the police being in the wrong on doing this act of violence? People would rather scoff and dismiss anyone arguing with their official story as conspiracy theorists.

This obvious behavior is how narcissistic people operate when they are spinning out of control. They reach a point where they have been allowed to get away with a certain abusive, controling behavior for so long that they no longer care about the obvious nature of what they are doing. Good people do not act that way so they try to rationalize the behavior to comprehend it. The only way to understand what they do is to have lived through it and get away from it. Then you can spot it more easily when it occurs around you. Narcissistic people are predators. They are usually only destroyed by allowing their own ego to get the better of them and let them consume themselves.

Dorner appeared to be much a product of the environment he was involved in. He was just after a different objective.

----------


## Lucille

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=49179




> I especially like listening to this woman repeat the LAPD remarks captured on the audio. The man she interviews (former FBI assistant director Tom Fuentes) can’t explain the comments, and says that the audio “should have been encrypted”. Nice.

----------


## jmdrake

> I don't know how they can get away with this, with plenty of evidence on radio records pretty clearly stating 'burn it' lol.


Here's how they know they can get away with this:

_ “Education is dangerous - Every educated person is a future enemy”----- Hermann Goering quote

Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
– Adolf Hitler

"It also gives us a very special, secret pleasure to see how unaware the people around us are of what is really happening to them."  ---Hitler (see)

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.--Adolf Hitler

What luck for the rulers that men do not think.--Adolf Hitler

Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.– Adolf Hitler_

----------


## Demigod

This whole thing is a setup and I really hate conspiracies.As I read they claim they found his drivers licence.Unless they started making those from rocks or titanium there is no way a drivers licence could survive a fire that a house and a human being can not.Also if they let the fire burn to the basement the chances of a  a drives licence surviving it are close to -100%

----------


## Dr.3D

> This whole thing is a setup.As I read they claim they found his drivers licence.Unless they started making those from rocks or titanium there is no way a drivers licence could survive a fire that a house and a human being can not.Also if they let the fire burn to the basement there is no way that a drives licence could survive it.


Yeah, they would have to dig through a lot of cinders and ashes to find something like that.

----------


## Demigod

> Yeah, they would have to dig through a lot of cinders and ashes to find something like that.


Even with all the cinder and ashes ID`s are maid out of plastic,the heat would be enough to turn them into a pool of plastic.

----------


## jmdrake

> This whole thing is a setup and I really hate conspiracies.As I read they claim they found his drivers licence.Unless they started making those from rocks or titanium there is no way a drivers licence could survive a fire that a house and a human being can not.Also if they let the fire burn to the basement the chances of a  a drives licence surviving it are close to -100%


I don't hate conspiracies, but I've been resisting considering this case a conspiracy because I get tired of everything like this turning to be suspicious enough to consider a conspiracy.

I was thinking other day that this is how conspiracy theories start.  Some tragedy happens.  The government tries to exploit the conspiracy.  Some folks resist the exploitation ("Hey, doesn't this guy still deserve due process?") and get shouted down by those holding tight to the official story ("What do you mean due process?  He's already been found guilty in the media!"), "facts" about the case dribble out which turn out to be so unbelievable that they get retracted, and eventually those who don't like the results of believing the official story quit believing the official story.

----------


## puppetmaster

Law enforcement can make any license they need using the records they have and the DMV.....so not unusual to have one in hand for them

----------


## Danke

Why couldn't the media just cut off the live broadcast, and play the recorded part later?

----------


## kcchiefs6465

NEW VIDEO OF CHRIS DORNER "SHOOTOUT"



The sound bites you could pull from this one...

----------


## kcchiefs6465

Here's the video I was looking for..

----------

