Cop killer in L.A. has had flight training

ClimbnSink said:
Because there is a bunch of audio recordings of the police saying they launched burners into the structure and it is on fire according to plan. Conspiracy to murder and murder 1. But that is just another day for the lapd. Troops overseas at war aren't allowed to use fire, our gov saves the specially nasty way to die for its citizens. Yay america. Yay to us for not caring.
Click to expand...

So, the LAPD was there?

Our military forces no longer use incendiary devices? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Sorry man, maybe next time they will hold starting the burn long enough for some nps rangers to get a few rounds in. Until then you can go back to chasing basejumpers and trying to confiscate private museums.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Sorry man, maybe next time they will hold starting the burn long enough for some nps rangers to get a few rounds in. Until then you can go back to chasing basejumpers and trying to confiscate private museums.
Click to expand...


I was just plumbing the depths of your hyperbole in case you actually knew what you were talking about.
 
A demonstration on how they will deal with those that refuse to turn in their "assault weapons", or "arsenals" in the future.
 
alaskaflyer said:
I was just plumbing the depths of your hyperbole in case you actually knew what you were talking about.
Click to expand...

Since you are a NPS employee, and I find you give accurate and honest answers / observations of the NPS using your decades of experience in that government sector....

I have to ask.....

Are you saying the National Park Service take over of the Pearson Air Museum is proper ?:dunno:.

And... did they try to seize private assets of the museum..:dunno:

Thanks in advance for your answer sir....

Ben.
 
Last edited:
I have heard tear gas canisters described as incendiary, that is they cause fire, but their primary purpose is gas delivery. I certainly can't blame law enforcement for deploying tear gas in this situation. I suspect the fire was more by product than primary.
 
N801BH said:
Since you are a NPS employee, and I find you give accurate and honest answers / observations of the NPS using your decades of experience in that government sector....

I have to ask.....

Are you saying the National Park Service take over of the Pearson Air Museum is proper ?:dunno:.

And... did they try to seize private assets of the museum..:dunno:

Thanks in advance for your answer sir....

Ben.
Click to expand...

Ben: Wrong thread to have that discussion, though considering the tone over there (and the volume of what I've already said) I'm not sure I have anything else to contribute? (edit: Actually, I changed my mind.)

For myself, in this current discussion, I only asked why ClimbnSink keeps blaming the LAPD for the result of a situation being managed and staffed by a different agency altogether, and I'm more than a little puzzled at his reply :dunno: :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
SkyHog said:
Well, they shouldn't have lit the structure on fire to begin with. Once they did, it should have become a rescue operation, since he was now cornered.

Bit conveniently, no one needs to answer for the crimes committed against Dorner.
Click to expand...

why do cops always get the benefit of the doubt? When the audio here clearly identifies them as being the aggressor - and the arsonists?

They reacted utterly emotionally - there was not 5% rational thought given to what was going on there - shoot, tear gas, fire.

Yes - he had been firing at them - yes he murdered one deputy and shot another - yes - he'd carjacked - but the facts are pretty clear - they executed him by fire. Intentionally.

That is so wrong -
 
Corpsmaide said:
If you do not mind, could you post the link to a recording...thank you
Click to expand...

the link is embedded in the link I gave above -

the audio was on good morning america today .. .

and no - it was not LAPD - it was the San Bernardino County Sheriff who acted more thug-like than many of the thugs they arrest on this effort -

And when the press yesterday began asking SBSD questions at the press conference about the crappy search they did after tearing up some houses - with the guy sitting in a house watching their command post for 4 days - and who set the fire and how it came to be on fire and who as the officer recorded on that audio - did they answer anything?

No - of course not. They walked off like little kids and basically said: "I don't want to talk about it." Nice. Professional. Accepting responsibility!
 
And why does it matter who the lead agency was at the time, there was obviously a 'kill him' memo out. Either that or the lapd just doesn't like pick up trucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top