Why Is The Government Seemingly Always Burning People Alive?

I’ve no loyalties to Christopher Dorner, or the Branch Davidians, but I do wonder why is the government seemingly always burning people alive when they have them supposedly surrounded and cutoff from support?

UPDATE: Cops actually say “Burn It Down!”, and they did.  YouTube video of 0:52 seconds.  Via American Digest’s Side-Lines.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/13 at 07:54 AM
  1. HA!
    I just turned the radio to Rush for the first time in about 10 years and he just asked, “Does anyone know where Janet Reno is?” Then he mentioned Waco in reference to the Dormer situation.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  02/13  at  01:39 PM
  2. I don’t care if they doused the bastard in gasoline and tossed matches at him, John.

    He murdered several innocent people, including a fifteen year old girl.

    End of and good riddance.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  02/14  at  12:14 AM
  3. Daphne, while I share your distaste of Dorner, I contend that the rule of law, which America allegedly adheres to, and which is of vital importance to Americans and America, was totally abrogated in the case of Dorner.

    I think that the minute the police learned of the murders committed by Dorner, and perused his manifesto, the police wanted Dorner dead, not alive.  Much like the corrupt cop character Lt. Eckhardt in the movie Batman, the police took the approach of “Shoot to kill.  If you know what I mean.”

    In support of that contention, consider the two newspaper carriers the police opened fire on without warning, or the Torrance man, David Perdue.  Are either of these actions indicative of apprehending a suspect?  No.

    And consider this seven word blurb buried in a LA Times story reporting on the death of Dorner, attributed to LAPD Chief Charlie Beck, regarding Dorner’s stated grievances against the police department.

    Beck has promised to review the case.

    It’s a bit late for that, don’t you think?

    It is indeed the end of Dorner, and while I will not mourn Dorner, I will mourn the continued abrogation of the rule of law in America.

    Posted by John Venlet  on  02/14  at  11:31 AM
  4. Maybe if it was Daphne’s house that was intentionally burned down she’d have a different perspective.

    How long will it take for the owner to be reimbursed?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  02/14  at  04:50 PM
  5. Maybe if it was my fifteen year old daughter Dorner had shot in cold blood I’d be dancing in the street at the bastard’s LAPD induced funeral pyre, Don.

    Seriously, how can any reasonable man condone Dorner’s murderous rampage? I don’t care if the LAPD had a target on his back after his tell all manifesto emerged, the man went on a brutal killing spree, ruining untold numbers of lives.

    John, I might be somewhat sympathetic to your point of view if the murderer had exited the cabin unarmed, hands raised and been shot in face. But he didn’t and he wasn’t.

    Either you believe in the sanctity of private property, which includes the primary right to one’s life, or you don’t.

    Dorner obviously didn’t hold that particular value in high esteem.

    I find it disturbing that many people on libertarian/anarchist right are extolling this particular man as a cause du jour merely to criticize the police.

    No favors are done to our cause when mass murders are used as poster boys.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  02/18  at  10:57 PM






Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

<< Back to main