The Dorner Psyop: Guns or Something Worse?

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: What is the actual evidence that Dorner killed those first two people? A manifesto posted on his Facebook page. That’s all the police are saying.

“Quan’s daughter, Monica, and her fiance, Keith Lawrence, were found shot dead Feb. 3 in a car in the parking structure of their Irvine condominium. Last Wednesday, after discovery of the manifesto, Irvine police announced they were searching for Dorner.” AP

As I stated before, that parking deck where those two were killed is full of security cameras and you have to have a card to gain access to it. They were killed on the top floor so whoever did it had to have been seen by at least one camera. Dorner is 6 feet and 300 pounds. It would be pretty obvious if he is seen on one of those tapes and yet we hear nothing about them. Instead, a Facebook posting is enough to charge someone with murder? Facebook? Really?

UPDATE: Dick Cheney likes Obama’s drone policy.


Look at how Glenn Greenwald phrased the question about sending drones using Hellfire missiles into a location where they think Chris Dorner might be hiding out. Tell me if this psyop isn’t perfectly scripted to get the American people to accept the use of drones against “domestic terrorists”.  I mean, I was wondering why they wrote the manifesto to make him look like a fan of the administration and the Bush/Cheney days and I couldn’t figure it out. Now I understand…. they don’t want their first drone kill in the U.S. to look political.

Surveillance dronesare now being used to try to locate him. LAPD are so apprehensive that they have already mistakenly shot at innocent people when they saw vehicles resembling the one they thought belonged to Dorner. Authorities suspect he’s hiding in “the icy wilderness” of Big Bear east of Los Angeles which, reported AP, is “filled with thick forests and jagged peaks, that creates peril as much for Dorner as the officers hunting him.”

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.

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 definition, then nothing is.

Now obviously, if attempts are made to apprehend Dorner and he uses lethal force to resist, then shooting or killing him would be justified, uncontroversially so. The FBI just killed a kidnapper in Alabama when he began shooting at the agents who tried to arrest him, and nobody objected. Law enforcement agents always have the right to defend themselves against people they’re trying to arrest if lethal force is used to resist. That’s an easy case, and not what I’m asking.

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, 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?” Greenwald

Greenwald’s logic here is so flawed I don’t know where too start.

First of all, who is going to challenge the authenticity of the Facebook manifesto? Dorner can’t because he is either on the run or incapacitated and even if he did, how would Glenn know it? You think CNN is going to run with that story?

The other day I listed a number of reasons this Dorner story looks like a staged psyop. From burning his truck to his history to reaching out to CNN before the whole thing kicked off… to the apparently missing security camera footage from inside the parking deck where the first two victims were shot… there are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding this case. To immediately assume guilt based on ZERO evidence…

… and let me repeat that for effect…

… Glenn Greenwald has seen ZERO evidence that this guy did anything at all. The ONLY “evidence’ is a manifesto posted on Facebook, which by the way is a digital copy and paste… it could have been put there by anyone.

That’s why we have trials in this country. That is what is meant by “due process of law”

Next, this isn’t about domestic terrorism. Even if you take the Facebook posting at face value as his, Dorner isn’t trying to change the political, social or economic structure of the country, he’s trying to clear his name (and, by the way, apparently they have reopened the case?) and that’s it. That’s not terrorism.

“Beck said he was not doing it (REOPENING THE CASE) to “appease a murderer” but out of concern that Dorner’s allegations will resurrect a painful part of the department’s history.” CNN

(So the LAPD is going to get some bad press out of this and immediately they decide to reopen the case to offset it. Do you think they would really do that if this was any other “terrorism” case? What ever happened to “we don’t negotiate with terrorists”?)

Now, if you wish to talk about terrorism in this country, talk about the Amerithrax case Mr. Greenwald. Talk about the controlled demolition of the economy in order to rush in neoliberal austerity measures. Talk about the FBI entrapping 20 or so half-wits to set them up for thwarted terrorists acts. Talk about “stop and frisk” in New York. That’s domestic terrorism.

So when Glenn says this is domestic terrorism or “nothing is”, he couldn’t be farther from the truth.

And again, his conclusion is based on a Facebook posting and I could put a manifesto on Glenn’s page if I wanted.

If the administration wanted a better case to be their first domestic drone target, they couldn’t have asked for a better situation and that includes that “accidental shooting” of the paper delivery women. All the press say that the cops are “on edge” and “tense” because this guy is a real threat.

Look, cops know, especially cops around L.A. and San Fransisco, that half the gang-bangers out there are twice as ruthless and dangerous as MOST of the ex-military running around the country today. Shit, some of the Latino gangs make them look like boy scouts… GAY boy scouts. So to say these cops, hardened on some of the toughest streets in the country, are all scared and shaky because of Dorner, is just silly. It’s exaggerated to the point of being insulting. Now that a cop is dead and another wounded, my guess is, most cops in the state of California WANT to run into this guy… not AWAY from him.

Chances are, this guy is going to end up dead by his own hand somewhere just like the string of American Gladio actors before him but if that does or doesn’t happen, the topic has been broached and this country is starting to talk seriously about allowing Obama and the CIA and any other “qualified” official decide to use hellfire missiles on U.S. soil to go after “domestic terrorists”

Glenn of all people should know what a horrifically slippery slope that is.

Perhaps Glenn is just putting out the feelers to get a discussion started and he plans to submarine those who sign onto his apparent approval of this step. Don’t know. I hope so.

But drones are not cruisers and hellfire rockets are not bullets. Yes, there can be collateral damage from a sniper rifle or a cop’s side arm, but that is NOTHING compared to what drones do and we know this for a fact and Glenn certainly knows it.

Setting this precedent is a departure from the direction we were headed in a few weeks ago, calling into question the use of drones across the world and now, thanks to the Dorner psyop, we are actually talking about using them more… here… again with no due process. That is of course unless like Glenn Greenwald, you think having a manifesto pop up on your Facebook page IS due process.

In that case, the sky’s the limit. Torture, rendition, indefinite detention and sure, drone strikes are the flavor of the day.

Me? I tend to require a higher standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”

18 Responses

  1. Yes, isn’t that the truth!

    BTW, Scott…. hope Church’s, (Scott’s dog), surgery is successful today.

  2. quite interesting how the Mayor used the word seamless…


  3. The ‘drones’ are getting smaller, like our eye phonies, and more in sym-phony, where all instrument players watch the ‘conductor’ for instructions. Are YOU on the same page, or is this the coda????

  4. so who is going to stop this?

  5. Imagine a drone being as powerful as a thought……. oh, you have?

  6. […] The Dorner Psyop: Guns or Something Worse? […]

  7. This is so crazy I can’t believe this is unfolding like this. Like Scott said this is the perfect situation. I live in socal and know the area and san bernardino where he burned his car is only an hour south of Edwards airforce base aka drone capital. Also there’s a marine base less than an hour south too, forget the name though. If they were going to call in the drones he’s real close to where they operate. Couldn’t be any better situation than that.

  8. ?Perhaps Glenn is just putting out the feelers to get a discussion started and he plans to submarine those who sign onto his apparent approval of this step. Don’t know. I hope so.?

    Um yup, the tone of the Greenwald piece was odd. I once received a letter from him that was phrased like this about the first amendment. I’m guessing he would agree with you on most of your points. It’s like a law test with lots of flawed assertions that a the student has to address
    in a synopsis statement. There will be more from him on this.

  9. I can see the headline of New York Post already: Dorner Droned!!!

    But, what are we to make of this guy’s absolute silence. If he manifesto or the any of his facebook postings are bogus and he is being framed, you would think that a battle hardened marine/cop who has a kill-on-sight order on him would find some way of communicating with the world and making some corrections, revelations, disclosures, etc.

    The extremely convenient storyline with no real evidence of this man’s actions past or present, I’d say he is either already deader than Lanza, or he does not really exist anymore as C. Droner and he is an asset of the dark side, or he was already an asset playing out a script to create the context for the discussion about domestic droning and manhunts, while casting a giant ugly shadow on the millions of US citizens who have served, or are serving in the armed forces or law enforcement, whom they consider a major threat when things get nasty enough to manhunt US citizens, conveniently happening as the senate “discusses” presidential kill lists and the classification ans killing of US citizens…

    And then, there is the race wedge they are pushing further and further in to the American psyche as a major tool of destabilization and division. I feel that aspect to this story might just be the cherry on their icing.

  10. Comment went to spamorium… May I have a recovery?

  11. Glenn is clearly on record opposing the use of drones. He’s being facetious in this case, trying to get a response from those who support drones so he can catch them applying a double standard. While I don’t think it’s one of his best columns, he’s clearly not seriously calling for the use of drones on Dorner. If anything, he’s warning that people will easily justify the use of drones in cases like this and their use domestically will be common place.

    Regarding “Now, if you wish to talk about terrorism in this country, talk about the Amerithrax case Mr. Greenwald. Talk about the controlled demolition of the economy in order to rush in neoliberal austerity measures. Talk about the FBI entrapping 20 or so half-wits to set them up for thwarted terrorists acts. Talk about “stop and frisk” in New York. That’s domestic terrorism..” – Glenn has addressed most of these topics several times. Check out his archives at Salon.

    • I agree, and actually this *is* one of my favorite Greenwald columns. It’s a subtly stated “thought experiment” aimed at all the nice liberals who have no problem with Obama’s overseas drone assassinations. If you support the use of lethal drones against someone like al-Awlaki, why wouldn’t you support the use of drones against Dorner? That’s *if* you support their use, and Greenwald does not (nor do I). Swift was not really advocating the eating of babies as an answer to Irish starvation (and overpopulation — a 2-for-1!), and Greenwald is not really advocating the use of drones.

  12. Haha didnt take long for Greenwalds fanbois to make an appearance. Took less than a minute of me posting this on twitter before pieholes were opened.



  14. cops said to burn down cabin…….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: