Christopher Dorner...The Manifesto

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by RhythmicGeek

Letting it burn could come back to bite them. That could be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Not to mention with his big manifesto (the actual one) he accused them of some pretty big things...


They then shoot up a truck and injury 2 innocent people


and let the house burn so that he dies..


Scared much?

[The Noob Avenger]

Originally Posted by RhythmicGeek

Letting it burn could come back to bite them. That could be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

It absolutely is, not only that, you can clearly hear them discussing "burners" and "Let's burn it, like we discussed".

Clear violation of the 8th amendment.

[The Noob Avenger]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

Not to mention with his big manifesto (the actual one) he accused them of some pretty big things...


They then shoot up a truck and injury 2 innocent people


and let the house burn so that he dies..


Scared much?

The big one is fake. There were no celebrity shoutouts.

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by The Noob Avenger

The big one is fake. There were no celebrity shoutouts.

Yeah, you can tell based upon writing styles that not all of it is his.

[The Noob Avenger]

Originally Posted by RhythmicGeek

Yeah, you can tell based upon writing styles that not all of it is his.

here's real one

http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-c...1360213161.pdf

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by The Noob Avenger

here's real one

http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-c...1360213161.pdf

Yep. People keep trying to make it into a political statement he was making, which it was not. It was a desperate man on a path of vengeance.

[STC]

What a mess.

I'm surprised he only got as few as he did. He sure seemed ready, willing, and able.

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by STC

What a mess.

I'm surprised he only got as few as he did. He sure seemed ready, willing, and able.

He lost focus and went off mission. Him firing at game wardens, him taking the fight to a different county, that is all contrary to what his stated mission was.

[STC]

Originally Posted by RhythmicGeek

He lost focus and went off mission. Him firing at game wardens, him taking the fight to a different county, that is all contrary to what his stated mission was.

That's kind of the surprising part. Maybe I'm overestimating his training/abilities to kill.

Who knows?

[BengalRugby]

Sorry if it was implied you were ranting, that was not my intention.

To me, honestly, it isn't very interesting at all. I have seen a lot of talk about it when I search for the topic. Mostly from right wing pundits who are shouting about no one talking about this stuff from his manifesto. Personally, I don't think it matters at all. Right or left, no one would condone the actions he has taken, so what do his ties to either side matter?


I do not think it "matters," but think it is interesting that it is getting zero play, except from sources leaning to the right. In addition, if he were spouting right wing propaganda, the silent sources would be all over it. A media bias we are all aware of, I know, but still irritating.


I would just like more of the manifesto explored by the media. We all know the big story, the guy is homicidal and looney toons. I like more of the backdrop and exploring his delusions. After all, this thread is about the manifesto...

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by STC

That's kind of the surprising part. Maybe I'm overestimating his training/abilities to kill.

Who knows?

I think that any person in that type of desperate state would have a hard time staying focused. It's obvious that there is some sort of mental instability there, and that would make it difficult as well.

[fredtoast]

It is always okay to set a house on fire in order to get the person to come out. That was all they were trying to do. Get him to come out and give up. He always had the option to do that instead of stay in the cabin and burn to death.

If they had blocked the doors so he could not get out then iot would be cruel to set the cabin on fire, but that was not the case at all.

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by BengalRugby

I do not think it "matters," but think it is interesting that it is getting zero play, except from sources leaning to the right. In addition, if he were spouting right wing propaganda, the silent sources would be all over it. A media bias we are all aware of, I know, but still irritating.


I would just like more of the manifesto explored by the media. We all know the big story, the guy is homicidal and looney toons. I like more of the backdrop and exploring his delusions. After all, this thread is about the manifesto...

Well, considering his original manifesto included zero political rants, it's more interesting to me about how the one with all that stuff added to it came to be.

[fredtoast]

Originally Posted by The Noob Avenger

They've just been repeatedly proving his point.

What was his pooint and what have they done to prove it?

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by fredtoast

What was his pooint and what have they done to prove it?

His point was there is corruption within the LAPD. Did he go about the best way to expose it? Nope but let's be honest no one would have listened to him if he went to the news.

[fredtoast]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

His point was there is corruption within the LAPD. Did he go about the best way to expose it? Nope but let's be honest no one would have listened to him if he went to the news.

But what have they done to prove his point?

I agree there is probably corruption in the LA police ddepartment, but there have bee many cases of corruption being exposed by the media. So I don't think the news media would have just ignored him if he had some actual evidence.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by fredtoast

But what have they done to prove his point?

I agree there is probably corruption in the LA police ddepartment, but there have bee many cases of corruption being exposed by the media. So I don't think the news media would have just ignored him if he had some actual evidence.

Shooting a truck that looks like his, First ever Drone used to find a man on American soil, Burning the Cabin.


Those are the three things that stand out to me.

[fredtoast]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

Shooting a truck that looks like his, First ever Drone used to find a man on American soil, Burning the Cabin.


Those are the three things that stand out to me.

Not a single one of those things gas anything to do with corruption and/or racism.

Shooting up a truck by mistake is a mistake not intentional corrupt action.

And there is nothing wrong at all with using a drone (no different from a police helicopter) or burning the cabin to force him out. Those are common accepted tactics.

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by fredtoast

It is always okay to set a house on fire in order to get the person to come out. That was all they were trying to do. Get him to come out and give up. He always had the option to do that instead of stay in the cabin and burn to death.

If they had blocked the doors so he could not get out then iot would be cruel to set the cabin on fire, but that was not the case at all.

Just curious, do you know of any prior incidents where this occurred? I mean, I could see the use of tear gas, flash-bangs, even some sort of foul smelling concoction to cause nausea. But the use of fire being set to an occupied building? That seems excessive, to me.

[SteelCitySouth]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

First ever Drone used to find a man on American soil,

Why does this even get a care from you or anyone else for that matter?

[SteelCitySouth]

Originally Posted by RhythmicGeek

Just curious, do you know of any prior incidents where this occurred? I mean, I could see the use of tear gas, flash-bangs, even some sort of foul smelling concoction to cause nausea. But the use of fire being set to an occupied building? That seems excessive, to me.

Yeah...I gotta agree here...setting a structure on fire to end a stand off seems real Wayco to me. Pun intended.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by SteelCitySouth

Why does this even get a care from you or anyone else for that matter?

Because it's a bit much, in my opinion that is.

[SteelCitySouth]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

Because it's a bit much, in my opinion that is.

It's a bit much to use an aerial surveillance device to find a criminal?...
I think a bit more explanation is in order.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by SteelCitySouth

It's a bit much to use an aerial surveillance device to find a criminal?...
I think a bit more explanation is in order.

It's the first one ever used on American Soil. That's what I heard on the news..now could that be a bad source? yes. If it's not the first one then hey I have no problem with it. Why don't we use them for every killer then? Because it was a cop in danger they use special devices?

[RhythmicGeek]

Originally Posted by SteelCitySouth

Yeah...I gotta agree here...setting a structure on fire to end a stand off seems real Wayco to me. Pun intended.

I hadn't thought about Waco. Of course, there is no way of truly knowing who set the fires there. One would think the reason the government denies doing so is because it would be wrong for them to do so.