I don't have an FB page, but as I understand it Christopher Dorner's FB manifesto includes praise for Piers Morgan and condemnation for Wayne LaPierre (NRA). Those facts don't seem to be mentioned on the lamestream shows.

It doesn't fit the narrative.

So, he shocked that the guy accused of killing cops is more popular that the cops shooting 90lb asian women they claimed were one 250lb man?

Will wonders never cease.

He murdered innocent people. He's a Timothy McVeigh, with less justification and thankfully fewer victims. I couldn't care less about his cause.

The police department is corrupt? Color me surprised. The Attorney General of the US gave guns to drug cartels with impunity. The Secret Service are pimps. This is news? The news was the highly trained professionals blowing away two ladies delivering newspapers. Not that it's surprising, but that it wasn't covered up.

And who says he murdered innocent people? The same LAPD that tried to murder three >100 pound women for driving trucks that didnt even look like his

Now I'm not going to go all conspiracy theory and claim the LAPD are lying about his killing of to innocent people - but its not hard to understand why some are loath to trust those cops under any circumstances.

Also I'm curious as to how many lawsuits this is going to generate, not just from the people gunned down indescriminatly by cops, but by ever Tom, Dick, and Joe Q Public surviving family members who received similar type off the wall screeds and were told the cops didnt have the man power to put a car out side to protect them.

If the cops have the manpower and money to pay overtime to half a dozen cops to sit on a few officers and their families homes each but didnt for people who werent law enforcement and law enforcement adjacent it seem to me wrongful death suits which ordinarily would be dismissed out of hand might not be anymore

Thank you for posting a reasoned response to the "bash all cops" thread that occurred the other day.

And who says he murdered innocent people?

Ok, here's what Popehat said:

Dorner murdered the child of a (real or imagined) enemy and that child's fiance.

For the purposes of this exercise, feel free to replace 'murdered' with 'killed', unless you don't think he actually killed this couple?

Next, tell me, if you can, what crimes they're guilty of and why someone not named Barack Obama is permitted to put them on a kill list and have them killed?

> I don't have an FB page

Here's the unredacted text. (Apparently the abrupt ending us authentic.)

Here's the unredacted text. ... -- Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 9, 2013 12:32 PM

I read through it.

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." -- F. Scott Fitzgerald

He goes through and essentially says that he is legally armed to the teeth because of the Second Amendment. Then he goes on to say we need an AWB, totally ignoring that all the firearms and accessories exist in private hands.

He praises Piers Morgan and demonizes Wayne LaPierre.

He wants redemption on his name and reputation for turning in a fellow officer. So let's go out and kill targets directly and randomly if they try to stop him.

Plain and simple this guy is messed up

REMEMBER, ONLY THE POLICE CAN BE TRUSTED WITH GUNS: 3 bystanders reportedly shot by police during hunt for murder suspect

"Bystanders" I think is a misnomer. That brings up visions of NYPD engaging a bad guy, missing, and hitting all sorts of people and things in the background, heedlessly.

These were all people who were hit in a hail of bullets sprayed heedlessly, but they were the intended "targets" shot at without warning or cause, but they weren't "bystanding" the scene, they were the actual targets (at the moment.)

Yeah, the headline should read "Three innocent people intentionally shot by trigger happy cops"
Cops too scared to bother to make sure the people they were shooting at were the person they were looking for

And if it was the person they were looking for its quite obvious they have no intention of giving him the option to surrender

Lujlp - The more I think about this horrible attempted murder, I think your last sentence is more certain than just trigger happy cops. It is like the movies where they have to be certain this guy does not get the chance to talk. This is beyond strange.

Well add in that for some reason the LAPD chief is re-opening the investigation that got him fired.

No kidding Jim P. What next.

No kidding Jim P. What next. -- Dave B at February 10, 2013 11:44 AM

There are a few options depending on what happens to Dorner.

To be quite frank, hunting an experienced, presumably uninjured, sniper in about 50K acres of woodland with clumsy police force in snow is similar to searching for a mouse in a Hollywood mansion with the French Army in tow.

He probably has acquired a new vehicle and has moved off the mountain at this point. So he is now stalking his list of targets in L.A.

There will be a lapse in security on one of his targets. I suspect it will be a head shot as all the targets are now wearing Class III armor or better.

He'll probably get the next target as well but will die in the firefight. Most sniper hides don't have 360 degree shielding. So he will take out at least one of the team that kills him. But when you are facing 50:1 odds your survival chances become nihil.

So then the LAPD chief will shutdown the re-investigation. The poor idiot cops that die as a result of the Dorner firefight will be buried with a full ceremony(s) aired on the local L.A. TV.

After that we'll see the corrupt L.A. cops go back to pattern in a few months. They'll do another Rodney King or similar in a few years and we'll repeat the cycle.*

* This is a long term projection depending on the fact that the economy and the U.S. doesn't collapse first.