DORNER MANHUNT; Liberal Media Suggests Drone Killing Dorner, Promotes EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING Of ‘Suspect’ Deemed ‘DOMESTIC TERRORIST’

February 11, 2013 by  
Filed under Americas, Featured, Media, Police State

Christopher Dorner has been deemed a “Domestic Terrorist”, and many in the so called “Liberal” media are calling for him to be killed by drone strike, without a trial (ie, extrajudicial killing), and they add, “why not just kill him?”

CNN first made a statement floating the idea of using a drone to kill Dorner… then the fake Liberal “Young Turks” decided to discuss this in great detail and, after acting so concerned about such an idea, they basically seem to conclude that it sounds like a good idea!!

To drone or not to drone, that is not the question… the concern here is that they are deeming Christopher Dorner a “Domestic Terrorist” and therefore they can kill him… WITH NO DUE PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!

Being deemed a “Domestic Terrorist” theoretically means Dorner no longer has any Constitutional Rights… this is a very DANGEROUS and horrible precedent.

Today the so called “Liberal” British newspaper “The Guardian” has proven my point in spades (and only a mindless British serf (subject) could come up with this kind of judicial logic).  These people are dangerously stupid, or they’re being told to write this garbage.  Here are some choice excerpts (emphasis mine):

 

Here’s my question: if the surveillance drones detect his location, should the lives of law
enforcement agents be risked, along with other civilians, in an attempt to apprehend
this highly-trained warrior? Why shouldn’t an armed drone instead be immediately
dispatched once his location is ascertained and simply kill him?

For those of you who believe it’s possible to know someone’s guilt without a trial, there
is very little doubt about his guilt. Nobody has contested the authenticity of the
confession posted in his name, nor the threats of further killing. He admitted and
justified the killings on his Facebook entry.  [No one has ever hacked, jacked, or created a fake Facebook account!!!! - Joel]

For those of you who believe there is a clear definition of “terrorism”, Dorner meets it
easily. LAPD chief Charlie Beck today said that Dorner was engaging in “domestic
terrorism”. That’s because he has not only threatened to kill random LAPD officers but
also their children and family members in order to terrorize the department into
publicly apologizing to him. He vowed to wage what he called “unconventional and
asymmetrical warfare” in pursuit of his goal. As intended, the entire community is in
terror. If that’s not “domestic terrorism” under the conventional defintion (sic), then nothing is.

Instead, suppose the LAPD locates Dorner in a cabin in a remote area of the California
wilderness, just sitting alone watching television. Why should they possibly risk the lives
of police officers to apprehend him? Why would anyone care if this terrorist’s rights are
protected? What’s the argument for not simply killing him the moment he’s located?
Given that everyone seems certain of his guilt [Trial by media? - Joel], that he’s threatened further killings of innocents, that he declared himself at “war”, and that the risk from capturing him would be high, what danger is created by simply shooting a Hellfire missile wherever he’s
found?

Or suppose that, as feared, he makes his way into Mexico. What’s the objection to
sending an armed drone to killing him there? [Um, because it's a different sovereign country???? - Joel]

The impetus for my asking is obviously the widespread support for killing US citizen
Anwar Awlaki without a trial or charges based on suspicions of guilt: it’s far from clear
that apprehending Awlaki would have been infeasible, and Dorner poses at least as
much risk to Americans as Awlaki did, almost certainly more so. But leave that aside:
independent of comparisons to any other case, including Awlaki, what would be wrong
or dangerous, if anything, about simply droning this domestic Terrorist to death even in
the absence of lethal resistance? What would be the harm from doing that? What are the
reasons not to, if any?

 

2013.2.11 Should An Armed Drone Be Dispatched To Kill Christopher Dorner? (guardian.co.uk):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/11/chris-dorner-drones-lapd

 

2013.2.8 CNN; Should We Use Drones In America? (CNN, TheYoungTurks, youtube.com):

 

CNN’s Erin Burnett asked whether or not law enforcement should use drones as they try to fine former cop turned revenge killer, Christopher Dorner.  Is this what it’s come to?  Are drone attacks abroad so normalized that we can honestly ask if drones would be a good idea to use domestically?  Cenk Uygur, Jimmy Dore (TYT Comedy) and Ben Mankiewicz (Turner Classic Movies) discuss Burnett’s question and its implications.

 

Silver Coins
Liberty Stickers

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

jbroku