So which 'uncensored manifesto' do you believe?

So, which one is true?
Jim Stone freelance
Or the one from B4iN that wont let me link it? You know, the one where a guy whom has just decided to die with honour, rather than live with shame, is complimenting Mrs O'bama on her new haircut? Y'know, the one where a guy that legally owns a Barret .50 and at least one AR-15 says Piers 'asswipe' Morgan is right?

If you know the above linked song, ignore it. But if you don't know it, listen, and think.
According to the 'extended' version of Mr Dorner's manifesto he hates you disrespecting the POTUS, and he wishes he was still around to watch 'hangover 3' and season 3 of 'walking dead' and he HATES the NRA. As well as loving every Clinton, including HR, I mean, PURLEASE?

In my personal opinion, this guy is 'the last american hero'. This is your last rallying call.

I tend to believe the one with the questionable stuff at the end myself. The main reason I believe it, is that it does the MSM and PTB absolutely no good to add it. We know that aside from the controlled opposition (Fox) the MSM has been rabidly promoting gun control and is basically the propaganda arm of the administration. Why would they add that stuff at the end? What good does it do them and their agenda? If it were added by either the controlled opposition (Fox) or the more rabid right wing media (brietbart, wnd, etc) the left leaning MSM would be all over it near immediately if for no other reason than to discredit media politically opposite of them.

I can only think of two scenarios that are remotely possible, one from media, and one from Dorner himself.

Dorner himself might have put that in even if he didn't believe it so that is disarmed the MSM's usual route in reporting on crimes comitted with firearms. They must focus on his allegations of corruption within the LAPD because politically he's pretty close to them, and they can't talk about that. If he doesn't believe what he wrote himself, he has expertly disarmed the normal MSM talking points.

The only reason the MSM or others with political power might possibly have added it, are that they are very aware of the tinderbox the US is at the moment over the 2nd Amendment, and aren't quite yet ready to implement whatever totalitarian utopia they have planned for us. Absent a political opinion on guns Dorner could very conceivable be a folk hero to those damn near ready to take up arms against who they view as oppressors themselves. And might end up as one anyway.

I became aware of this story early Thursday. Some of the very first copies of the "manifesto" I saw had that you just had to read a bit to get to it.

Personally, I believe he wrote the LAPD stuff over a period of time, edited and finished it. It is extremely well written and has few grammatical errors. I think he added the other stuff as an after thought. I think it was written over time as well, but in different moods (maybe even while drinking).




BTW OP, horrible forum to put this in. Only reason I even noticed to comment is I finally un-hid this forum two months after the election.

reply to post by jefwane

Jim Stone claimed to have been watching Dorner's fb and grabbed this as soon as it appeared. The 10 page reads coherently to me, the 20 odd page reads schizophrenic.

I don't have much psychology background, but it doesn't seem schizophrenic to me. To me it looks like stuff added as an afterthought. I'm near positive he worked on that first half, edited, worked on it again, and then edited again.

I don't think someone with schizophrenia could have cut it in both the LAPD and Navy for as long as he did.

I view the document as first half indictment of LAPD's systemic corruption and excessive use of force, and the second half as something akin to a suicide note written by someone who plans on committing suicide by cop. It's alternating serious and whimsical, and I think it could very easily be influenced by alcohol.

reply to post by jefwane

BTW OP, horrible forum to put this in.

Horrible? I think it is entirely political, and mad. I've been watching these incidents with interest for many years now. Jean Charles De Menezes in the UK springs to mind. The police issued a statement that Mr Menezes (who was Brazilian) 'looked asian'. He left the property under surveillance wearing a 'puffa jacket'. LIE. He was wearing a wrangler type jacket. ' 'He vaulted over the ticket barrier at the tube station' LIE he sauntered up and used his oyster card like everyone else. He started running on the tube platform, when he saw men with guns bearing down on him. He managed to shout 'help' while he was held down on the floor of the tube train and shot 7 times in the head. So yes, I tend to view things with an entirely healthy scepticism. If you believe what the police, and that other arm of the octupus the media tell you, you deserve what you get.

I do understand people questioning the authenticity of the second part of Dorner's manifesto. I wondered for a bit myself.

The question I have for those that think the second part (or parts of the second part) is not legitimate is twofold. Who would want to insert the AWB and praise for Boxer, the Obamas, Morgan, and the Clintons, and why did they insert that?

I've given my two thoughts above, and also why it would make little sense for the MSM to add that. I'm more than interested in hearing other ideas though.

reply to post by freebornman


I was mentioning that because I thought it was originally in political breaking news, and I made that statement because there is little activity in that forum, and was afraid the thread would die due to lack of interest. So either I was mistaken on it's original location, or a mod moved it here. Either way, I think this forum is fine.

The question I have for those that think the second part (or parts of the second part) is not legitimate is twofold. Who would want to insert the AWB and praise for Boxer, the Obamas, Morgan, and the Clintons, and why did they insert that?

reply to post by jefwane

Creates 'cognitive dissonance'. Neuro-linguistic programming springs to mind.

I was mentioning that because I thought it was originally in political breaking news, and I made that statement because there is little activity in that forum, and was afraid the thread would die due to lack of interest. So either I was mistaken on it's original location, or a mod moved it here. Either way, I think this forum is fine.

Phew, glad we're not going to get into a 'war of the worlds' over that then. Seriously though, a man who knows he will die in a hail of bullets, and soon, has the time to say 'nice bangs' to mrs O? This guy is american first, he aint ghetto, he loves O'bama, and George Dubya? And I say again, he's ex-military, owns a Barret .50, and is anti-30rd magazines and AR-15's??? Sorry, does not compute. Cognitively Dissonating while trying.