A Second LAPD Officer Steps Forward With His Own Manifesto

Seems like these guys have had similar experiences. They took a different approach to the situation.

One approach has brought issues to my attention and to the attention of many. The other approach did absolutely nothing. There is a point where zen ends and kick @$$ begins.

Changes usually occur when someone has had enough and becomes some sort of martyr. They are usually condemned by many but there are times when they are a catalyst for something.

I am not saying dorners cause is just but you can only push around and abuse so many people until you PO the wrong person. For the sake of argument lets say what happened to this dorner guy was not that big of a deal... but how many other times have those people that abused him abused other people much worse and those have said nothing.

I think is see dorners point of view. You are wronged by the people who are supposed to be the law. So who holds those accountable?? No one. If they are corrupt you will never know cuz they cover their backs. It could be possible that they need to do this to survive. It could be that they need to abuse people to get their job done. At one point that will lead them to be just as corrupt as those they deal with.

Should innocent people die because of this?? No Both sides dorner and the lapd are guilty of this. However one is protected and the other is subjected to a man hunt.

For those of you who say you've read the link---how? It's password protected! I have nothing to say or add to this thread since I cannot access the article in its entirety!!!

An opinion is not a manifesto. I'm wondering if Dorner is being painted as a maniac and is outrunning a pack of bad cops. Everyone who is in the wrong must be punished. Dorner, the police force, and anyone else who is dirty.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


No problem Wrabbit, it is an easy assumption to make.

Even though I would love to see these tragedies light a fire under the majority and motivate a revolution... 'peaceful revolution', I think most of us know that order is teetering on the line between RealityCity and FantasyLand, and it's about to lose balance toward the FantasyLand side.

A peaceful revolution, one that would bring the big change we'd all like to see, is almost a waste of time to consider. Without real force and consequences, it will be hard to sway any government stance on the issues under fire.

Also, I can see where you (or anyone) may assume revolution means 'Combative Revolution', since most of us understand the only way to gain attention, and subsequent change, is through the threat or use of force.

Seeing the word 'Revolution' does create a mental picture of confrontations where use of force with deadly weapons is common.

A peaceful revolution that ushers in real, important change, would be like a fairy-tale. Even if a peaceful revolution gets under-way, it would probably morph into physical altercations soon after. Whether it be a protestor becoming violent or Law Enforcement Officials inciting combative confrontations, it is a stretch to think a major revolution could begin peacefully and end the same way.

Can anyone name the last real national revolution that began peaceful, ended peaceful, and accomplished the goals set by the citizens? I'm not asking to prove a point, I am asking because I really don't know the last time that occurred.

I'll keep dreaming of a peaceful revolution that really is effective, where no one had to lose their life or health.

reply to post by esteay812

Honestly? The last one? Look to the former Soviet Republics after the GDR fell with it's Evil wall. Only one of those Governments falling actually came to violence as I recall it from watching events then. Chauchesku just didn't know when to quit and make the exit all evil dictators are supposed to at least try for. As I recall, he did order his military to open up on the people and that is what finally pushed it to his being drug out and executed by those same John Q type people in the street.

The rest were pure internal rot and corruption about to fail anyway when the Soviet Union stopped backing them to the hilt and people power did the rest. So it can happen. Egypt's first run through was also largely peaceful as was Tunisia. The fact we're now all seeing more was behind it all doesn't change the fact the people BEING replaced certainly didn't see the bigger picture at the time either, I'm sure. They'd have fought like wildcats if they'd known there was absolutely nothing to lose anyway. So those are also examples (albeit where things weren't exactly quiet, either.....almost violent).

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


When I try to think of peaceful protests and even revolutions, an image of a couple barefoot hippies laid back on a burlap blanket in the middle of a field, comes to mind, complete with tie-dyes, long hair with flower tiara worn by the girl, round 'Lennon' glass frames on the guy, and bell bottoms.

In a situation where the stakes are so high, I imagine it would be very very difficult for everyone to remain calm and collected, especially those on the losing side. There would be so much for the government to lose that they would never initiate change without first attempting to silence the movement through force.

reply to post by esteay812

I believe the formal movements that have taken time, thought things out and then moved deliberately have been what either led to ongoing civil wars like has characterized Central and South America for decades now or got stomped hard and fast when one too many people heard about it and said something.

The ones that succeed, as I've noticed in my life to see some of the history over time, are the ones almost spontaneous in nature and absolutely so in how they just build upon themselves and 'go viral' for lack of a better term. Even Marcos falling in the Philippines came down to that to some degree. It was a coup as well, but the people power did what the Military units couldn't have alone and it was largely last minute to most that made the numbers. That was before the net, let a lone twitter. lol...

I guess it's just a matter of seeing what happens and what, if anything comes as a true trigger event to kick people off the fence and all at about the same time.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I guess anyone who is interested in conspiracy theories in general is much more likely to either see something that isn't really there or discover something that the average person would miss.

I mention this because what I am about to say could be construed several different ways...

It seems like there are so many different things going on globally that appear to be connected in someway, that there must be a climax at some point.

All of these issues must eventually reach a critical mass point where the issues will be resolved or they will collapse back on everything that has held them up for so long.

There are major global concerns politically, financially, scientifically, and religiously that must be resolved. They seem to be associated with one another in some manner, but I can't say how, because I don't know.

Maybe it is just a side-effect from looking at all these different conspiracy theories and trying to reconcile the issues with what I understand. None of these things may be connected, but there sure seems to be a relationship among them.

If there is a political, financial, or religious collapse, I hope it doesn't trigger the crash of the other major concerns. I don't think a peaceful or combative revolution of any size could save us from an implosion of a majority social collapse.

I apologize if I am not making enough sense, , I'm pretty tired and heading to bed. If you reply, I'll respond tomorrow - that is, if the world still exists as it does now.

good maybe the GOOd cops will out the BAD cops . like it supposed to be in the first place.


now if we can get this to catch on and then start a wildfire on the way up to government and get rid of the scumbags who all had money on the 3 flights on 9/11(none in jail yet). lets hope all the scum bags get outed.

reply to post by WHOS READY


As long as the "good" cops protect their corrupt brothers, no such occupy can or will take place.

You can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped.

This is just a bizarre distraction from the real Patriot movement of the Oathkeepers who are currently telling this admin to go jump in the lake.

Originally posted by esteay812
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

When I try to think of peaceful protests and even revolutions, an image of a couple barefoot hippies laid back on a burlap blanket in the middle of a field, comes to mind, complete with tie-dyes, long hair with flower tiara worn by the girl, round 'Lennon' glass frames on the guy, and bell bottoms.

I'm always amused by people who minimize those hippies. If you lived during those times as I did, you'd know that they played a significant part in making the public aware of the illegal war in Vietnam. I'm convinced that they helped speed the end to that war, probably by several years.

Originally posted by AntiNWO

Originally posted by esteay812
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

When I try to think of peaceful protests and even revolutions, an image of a couple barefoot hippies laid back on a burlap blanket in the middle of a field, comes to mind, complete with tie-dyes, long hair with flower tiara worn by the girl, round 'Lennon' glass frames on the guy, and bell bottoms.

I'm always amused by people who minimize those hippies. If you lived during those times as I did, you'd know that they played a significant part in making the public aware of the illegal war in Vietnam. I'm convinced that they helped speed the end to that war, probably by several years.

Yah except that they were mostly being led by anti establishment radical leftists and communist sympathizers such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who were actually involved in the Kent State riots.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


I don't want to get too off-topic, but you do make a valid point. My contention is just that if enough people organize we can control the direction of politics, despite the best efforts of the elitists in Washington.

Originally posted by AntiNWO
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

I don't want to get too off-topic, but you do make a valid point. My contention is just that if enough people organize we can control the direction of politics, despite the best efforts of the elitists in Washington.

It is unfortunate that not all activists are on the same page. For instance, Occupy Wall Street wants to get rid of Capitalism and institute direct democracy and get the govt to pay for their student loans...while the Tea Party wants less govt intrusion in our personal lives, less taxes, and more adherence to the Constitution.

The country is split ideologically.