BUUUUURRRRNNNNN mf BBBUUURRRRNNNNNNN

[RTFM]

So, apparently what works in Waco - works in CA now also.

http://www.infowars.com/lapd-audio-from-dorner-siege-burn-this-motherfucker/

Police audio from the Christopher Dorner siege reveals a deliberate plan to burn down the cabin in which Dorner was trapped, with one officer heard to say, “f....k burn this motherfucker,” before police discussed their intention to, “go ahead with the plan with the burners.”

The audio was captured on police scanners as well as being picked up by a local news broadcast. More than seven agencies, federal, state and local were involved in the final hours of the siege. The LAPD SWAT Team was airlifted in to carry out the final raid, with reports later confirming, “the SWAT team had the cabin surrounded.” San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies were also involved in the standoff. The video above is from captured police scanner transmissions which were broadcast online shortly before authorities ordered them to be disabled.

“Alright, we’re gonna go ahead with the plan with the burners,” one officer says.

“Copy,” replies another.

“Like we talked about,” the first officer responds.

“The burners are deployed, and we have a fire,” says another officer moments later, before the police dispatcher repeats the statement.

Within minutes of the fire starting, police note that the cabin is “starting to collapse.”

Police are also heard discussing if they are ready to “bring fire”.

“Burners” is police slang for tear gas canisters, which are known to cause fires.

More at the link, and the full 5min police / fed audio of them burning the house down while he is suspected inside. 
Any reason I guess to feel macho.

[BBJohnnyT]

Any reason I guess to feel macho.

I listened the whole time to the scanner feed and heard this.  It was also just one soundbite by one guy of the entire operation.  Darkness was closing in and they made a calculated decision.  For the most part, the chatter was very methodical and professional.  I'm certainly not going to play Monday Morning Quarterback and criticize what they had to do under this intense and extremely volatile situation.  Remember, 2 cops were shot, one killed, just earlier in the conflict.  That changes the rules, IMO.

[RTFM]

No - power is intoxicating, these guys smelled blood - they wanted blood - they had revenge - they had a captive audience and in stead of doing THEIR JOB they decided to be judge - jury and executioner all in the space of 5 min.

Next time, when the bad man hides out in over populated Korea town..... do we burn down the tenement house?
Kill them all. God will recognize his own?

[jnevis]

No matter what anybody did, Dorner wasn't going to jail.  It wasn't in his plan at all.  If they had let him sit, without the tear gas, he would have eventually worn down and shot himself or tried to shoot his way out which wouldn't have gone well.
Using tear gas on a barricaded suspect that has a history of firing on officers, in an area that is getting dark but has plenty of escape routes if the suspect can get away from the structure, makes sense to me.   If they waited him out, how long before he either tries to sneak out at night, or more likely shoots his way out?  It had worked for him to that point.

We had a guy do something similar in Fresno.
He ambushed and shot a Deputy and stole his cruiser and headed up in the mountains.  as the SWAT guys got close, he'd take a couple shots at them and disappear.  Kept it up for a couple days and then was seen going into his sister/SIL's trailer.  Was holed up in the trailer for a day.  Decided he'd had enough and came out the front door with a rilfe pointed at a partol car.  Din't last long after that.

[tombogan03884]

I posted this in another thread, but the OP here and the shooting of innocents in Torrence underlines what I said.
Neither the LAPD or the media are exactly known for their honesty , or integrity.
I reserve judgement.
It seems darned odd to me that a Naval officer would sulk for 4 years before going on this sort of rampage.
Second, a 31 page manifesto isn't something you spend 4 years writing, especially not with so many up to date references.
If he were that peeved he would have started writing and not stopped until he was done or had to stop for sleep, a couple days at most.
And it's not as if his life were destroyed if he could afford to have a place in Las Vegas.
There's something we're not being told.

It makes me laugh at you all when I'm the voice of reason and restraint.

[Sponsor]

[oldkat69]

    Hey! It worked at Waco!

[jnevis]

There could be all kinds of reasons why he picked now to write his paper and start shooting people. 

I haven't looked into it, but if he tried to sue for his job back and the courts finally ruled on it, or he just got the BILL for said suit and can't afford to pay it for example.

They keep mentioning his involvement in the Reserves, maybe the Reserves just pulled his clearance and told him to pack sand since the reason he was let go from LAPD was for false statements.  Easy to loose a clearance and be told to leave at that point. The Reserves wouldn't have known about why he was fired unless he told them, which he probably didn't, until a re-investigation for a clearance, by coincidence every five years and usually started a year out.

Lot's of people have/had homes in Vegas, more than half the town is in foreclosure, another trigger.  Had moeny to get one while on deployment, comes back and now can't pay for it.  Money runs out and can't sell it, usualy takes a couple years of hanging on before it finally collapses.

The list keeps goign and goign.  Do we know anything about a girlfriend or wife? Couldn't stand the fuming about losing his prestigious position with LAPD and left him. 

[scottr]

...Remember, 2 cops were shot, one killed, just earlier in the conflict.  That changes the rules, IMO.

I don't know if you are a LEO, and it doesn't really matter. But... I hope you read that again, and try to understand what it sounds like. Because to me it sounds way too close to anytime an officer is injured or killed the suspect can be put on an execution list, and that 'rule change' is OK.

No you didn't say that, and I don't believe you meant that. But let's not put vengeance before justice, and let's not have cops shoot first, randomly, and with disregard for others. Because that seems to be the other result of a 'rule change'.

It is tragic that officers were shot and killed, and Monica Quan and Keith Lawrence murdered. Dorner should have paid for that, and everything else he did. He probably should have ended up dead, whether by being shot (his choice) or after being captured, tried, and sentenced. Within the legal system, not via a hit squad.

Bigger picture, let's take a moment and look at what that thie LAPD 'rule change' (official or not) seems to have resulted in for people other than Dorner. When LAPD fires 20-30 rounds at a pair of newpaper delivery women, wounding both of them, and shrugs off the circumstances and results we should all be cognizant of what happened. When Torrance PD stops and questions a white guy, lets him go, and his truck is almost immediately rammed by a police car and he is shot at, it should make everyone question exactly what all these officers were trying to do. When black males wear shirts stating they are not Dorner and please do not shoot them, and pickups have signs saying they are not Dorner and please don't shoot them it may strike us as (morbidly) humorous. But maybe it means that So Cal residents felt an element of naked, raw fear. In America, that shouldn't be what the police inspire.

Was Dorner a violent whack-job? Yes. Do I feel bad that he is dead? No. But the reality that LEOs can seemingly randomly shoot people and have no legal ramifications should give us all pause.

[JC5123]

Was Dorner a violent whack-job? Yes. Do I feel bad that he is dead? No. But the reality that LEOs can seemingly randomly shoot people and have no legal ramifications should give us all pause.

The president did just say that he has the power to execute Americans on U.S. soil without trial or charge. Seems to me that the machine is simply employing that. And THAT is what should give us pause.

[tombogan03884]

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2013/02/13/brown-obamas-gone-jack-bauer-on-us/?subscriber=1

Brown: Obama's Gone Jack Bauer on us

The Obama administration seems to have gone Jack Bauer on us, which would be okay if we were just talking about non-American enemy combatants on some far-flung battlefield.

It seems the administration danced its way around case law and the Constitution in an attempt to justify the assassination of three American citizens it refuses to acknowledge it had any part of, post execution. In September 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki, the mastermind behind the failed December 25, 2010 airplane BVD bombing, and his cohort, Samir Khan were killed. Two weeks later, in a separate drone attack, Denver native and 16-year-old son of al-Awlaki followed his father's fate.

According to the Washington Post, "a recently leaked 'white paper' from the Justice Department...permits the government to kill its citizens in secret while refusing to acknowledge, even after the fact, that it had done so."

No matter how evil someone is, it is unnerving that any president wouldn't hesitate to blatantly disregard an American citizen's constitutional right to a trial and then make the decision to become prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner of that same citizen — and not man-up afterward.

To be clear, the use of drones on the modern battlefield has proven effective, but great ideas in the wrong hands can sour quickly.

In the recently crafted white paper, the administration makes a weak argument to justify its seeming extrajudicial power grab by suggesting "the use of lethal force" against an American citizen is equivalent to George W. Bush's detention of foreign enemy combatants.

It seems like only yesterday a then-junior senator from Illinois repetitively repudiated Bush's actions that included the capture, detention, and questioning of non-American enemy combatants, and a military-style christening of a few. Many say Bush's actions led to information regarding Osama bin Laden's whereabouts and eventual elimination.

What a difference a little (or a lot of) power makes. There's a new sheriff in town and, suddenly, the North Star we Americans call the Constitution is no longer the effective navigational tool it once was. Now it's okay to assassinate citizens and grant due process to non-citizens.

After Obama's election, his administration became obsessed with lavishing constitutional rights on Guantanamo Bay terrorists and tried to move them to New York City where they'd be granted due process. Back in August 2012, Attorney General Holder told Bloomberg he still regrets the "missed opportunity."

To complicate things, the white paper extends the battlefield to any foreign country. Page 7 suggests "clear evidence" -- that a specific act will occur in the near future -- is not required. Page 11 supports killing those simply in the scheming stage, leaving no room for a change of heart. They are guilty because they thought about it. To be fair, the paper does identify potential targets as high level leaders, and it also lists "capture" as an option, but contradicts itself considering what supposedly happened to the16-year old Denver resident. Guilty by association?

Throughout the 16-page document, the white paper intermittently leaves out the word "al-Qaida," and uses the term "terrorist groups" (or variants thereof), which would be of no concern were we dealing with a more transparent and less paranoid administration. Lest we forget, they put out the "Right-wing extremists" watch list in 2009 secretly informing police forces to look out for those who love God, celebrate freedom, adhere to wholesome values, and cherish the Constitution.

What one generation does in moderation the next does in excess; the same goes for presidents. Baby steps. As simplistic as it is, two wrongs will never make something right. We are now witnessing liberals using Bush's so-called extra-judicial activities as case law to justify stepping deeper into the darkness in support of third world-like capital punishment without trial. So what might this president, or his successor, try next?

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.

In all criminal prosecutions, 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, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.