Reddit transcribers claim police started fire in Dorner case.

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by Infi8nity

 

My avatar is the ICP, or Insane Clown Presidents.

Its nothing more than a joke alluding to the ludicrous and crass band Insane Clown Posse. As you can see, they are wearing the ICP style makeup.

Ahh I see...
The reason I ask is moammar gadhafi was not who the media portrayed him to be. Their is allot of info on the net.

Originally posted by winofiend

I've listened to police scanners a lot of my life.

I've yet to hear a distressed officer call for the fire dept. because a building has caught on fire.

You're applying how you'd react to a situation you can only assume about.

This is how it always starts. soon we'll have 'truthers' come out and bag the 'official story people' and using a 'burner' as the new 'pull it'.

terminology... who needs it when we all know already what the other guy means.

Remaining calm and professional under pressure is one thing, however EXPECTING something to happen is another. These guys had a "plan" ...and listening to the audio it doesn't take a genius to logically figure out what that "plan" was.

Originally posted by six67seven
reply to post by AutOmatIc

 

so it sounds like Dorner decided to stay in the cabin to burn instead of coming out to surrender?

accidental or on purpose, he decided not to come out... ?

What is the agenda behind this thread, what would you like me to take away from it?

Well that is IF Dorner was in the cabin to begin with...that fact is still just an assumption at this point. There's no "agenda" behind this thread...it's ok to take a subject and just discuss it, use common sense and logic to deduce an opinion regarding the subject matter. Peace.

reply to post by VonDoomen


Duh.

What I find interesting is that he indiscriminately fired at officers that responded to his situation without knowing if they are corrupt or not. Makes you wonder if he ever had good intentions at all.

If you read his manifesto, it would appear he is the true racist. Racist people see great meaning in terms like N word or C word or "wet back".

These words mean next to nothing to people here in MI; it does seem to be a big problem down south though. Dorner was a violent racist snitch, much like many corrupt police. It seems he is the definition of what he wanted to destroy.

As far as police brutality goes, it definitely needs to be addressed. I don't think a cop going on a killing spree is the best way to address this issue.

However, I can see how a godless man can become easily confused and led astray. The old saying 'if you believe in nothing you will fall for anything'.

I pray God has mercy on his soul. Without God, he could not know the severity of what he was doing. Without law no transgression (Romans). Even with the severity of his crimes we are not to judge if he went up or down.

The police were too scared to shoot it out with him, so they burned him. Looks like it is time to change the way the system works. We can not have police that are scared of death. That is contradictory to their job. At the very least 3 innocents were shot at because of scared police. Scared police get innocent dogs shot all the time in their rush to collect evidence.

The way the system is designed, you can not be a good cop. Dorners actions did not change this, and neither did his death.

Watched a news brief.
Cops stated that first regular tear gas was used, then "pyrotechnic tear gas" was used and started the fire
The pyrotechnic tear gas is also caller by PD the "Burners"

That's their story so far.
They also said they didn't think anyone else was in there. they also said they are pretty sure it was Dorner
inside the cabin.


By the way
"Pyrotechnic Tear Gas" is what what started the fire at the Waco siege.

Originally posted by six67seven
reply to post by AutOmatIc

 

so it sounds like Dorner decided to stay in the cabin to burn instead of coming out to surrender?

accidental or on purpose, he decided not to come out... ?

What is the agenda behind this thread, what would you like me to take away from it?

Hate to state the obvious, but he was probably already dead when they started the fire. He died in the bullet swarm that happened before the fire, and that put more holes in that cabin than there are ants in an ant-mound. The fire was used to get rid of the evidence of "excessive force" being used, and as the cabin was completely destroyed (later ripped apart completely by a machine, save one wall), there was no point having it stand anyway.

At this point they can´t even be sure Dorner was actually ever in the cabin, except another "wallet" they mysteriously retrieved with Dorners name on it. That would be the third wallet they found in the last week btw.

reply to post by AutOmatIc

Well that is IF Dorner was in the cabin to begin with...that fact is still just an assumption at this point. There's no "agenda" behind this thread...it's ok to take a subject and just discuss it, use common sense and logic to deduce an opinion regarding the subject matter. Peace.

well, thats not entirely accurate. every piece of news, no matter who delivers it, has an agenda. You may want to use a different term, but there is a point the messenger is trying to convey, every time. And the message received depends on how it is delivered, and the paradigm of the individual audience member. This also applies to replies/responses.

anyway - i was asking questions, looking for answers (obviously) as a participant in the discussion. how else am I supposed to "use common sense and logic to deduce an opinion regarding the subject matter" if i don't have sufficient information?

as i mentioned, i havent followed the story from beginning to present and was hoping someone could provide a synopsis and significance of the fire-starter.

and IF it isn't Dorner's body ... well that would be interesting now wouldnt it?

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by six67seven
reply to post by AutOmatIc

 

so it sounds like Dorner decided to stay in the cabin to burn instead of coming out to surrender?

accidental or on purpose, he decided not to come out... ?

What is the agenda behind this thread, what would you like me to take away from it?

Hate to state the obvious, but he was probably already dead when they started the fire. He died in the bullet swarm that happened before the fire, and that put more holes in that cabin than there are ants in an ant-mound. The fire was used to get rid of the evidence of "excessive force" being used, and as the cabin was completely destroyed (later ripped apart completely by a machine, save one wall), there was no point having it stand anyway.

At this point they can´t even be sure Dorner was actually ever in the cabin, except another "wallet" they mysteriously retrieved with Dorners name on it. That would be the third wallet they found in the last week btw.

now that was easy, wasn't it?

thank you for stating the obvious, as it wasn't so to me. i'm late to the party and given what you stated above, i'm now interested and will find a thread that covers the Dorner gamut.

i don't watch news on the tele and I haven't been visiting ATS or other news sites for a couple weeks. sometimes i need a break from all the bad news!

again, ty.

There are a plethora of tear gas devices. Some "burn" and others don't. "Burners" are generally used outdoors for riot and crowd control. "Burners" combust to disperse their chemicals into larger clouds that cover larger areas. They spew sparks and become too hot to pick up and "throw back". They burn longer so the area affected has a growing cloud of dispersant. These are strictly outdoor crowd dispersal types of teargas canisters, where little danger of fire is expected and any wind is negated by the volume of dispersant. Sometimes the wind is used to advantage to build a fog bank of moving irritant in a direction that clears an area of "demonstrators".

You would never want to use this kind inside a building or dwelling, because that would be like throwing road flares through windows. The idea with indoor (non flammable) devices is to drive people out of the building into the waiting arms of police, not set the place on fire. These types of devices exist. With a little reading you can find them here...

Tear gas cannisters for indoors

reply to post by intrptr


What you say is true, never the less the cops at the news conference in Cali. stated that is what they used after trying others with no result.
The Man in charge called them "Burners"

Having listened to the audio I really can't see how there is any doubt that the police started the conflagration?

I guess this is the first of the 'Many Wacos' that were predicted not so long back.

Puts the whole Branch Davidian thing into a rather nasty new perspective doesn't it.

reply to post by azureskys

"Pyrotechnic tear gas"? Yes, I guess the heat and fumes from a structure engulfed in flames would work too.

One way or another.

Originally posted by AutOmatIc
reply to post by flyswatter

 

"known terminology"? Burner is also used in reference to a gun. So did they plant guns that magically caught fire? It wasn't merely the "burner" comment that made me believe they intentionally burned the cabin down....but quite a few other comments made by the "public servants" such as:

“f**king burn this motherf**ker”

“bring fire”

“burn that f**king house down.”

...I don't believe that we are "misinterpreting" their intentions one bit.

I'm not attempting to find intentions. I was simply saying that which you quoted was at least partially incorrect. What else "burner" can refer to is of no consequence to why I was bringing it up. It said burner is never used for tear gas, and that is absolutely incorrect.

How can anybody say Dorner was already dead during the initial exchange of gunfire, when all reports coming out are saying that once the blaze started, there was a single gunshot from inside the dwelling? Or was that just live ammo cooking off, but only one round reached the temperature required to cook off?

As for whoever it was that said they 'expected' it to happen, I'd like to know your facts on how you know what the officers were expecting. That means statements taken before hand, not suppositions gathered after the fact from garbled radio transmissions, with your own pre-set mind's interpretation added to them. Clearly you WANT there to be a plot to set fire to the building, so thats what you heard. I spent over a decade using radios in and around "adverse circumstances" and I can probably count on one hand the number of times true professionals lost their crap over the radio and started screaming for help. Untrained and unprepared people do that, not people who've been around the block a time or two. Sorry, your assumptions are incorrect.

This is absurd and tragic.

The police force should be tried for breaking the constitution.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

reply to post by VonDoomen


Of course they set the fire, they didnt set it to "flush" him out either because if they had, they wouldnt have completely surrounded the cabin with "burners"
They wanted to execute this man with minimal risk to themselves, they are nothing more than cowards and murderers.

Dude this has been mentioned in just about every Dorner thread on ATS at the moment.

Many members of ATS heard it as it was said on the scanner.

reply to post by AutOmatIc


I think "burner" in this situation refers to the AN-M14 thermite grenade:

AN-M14 Incendiary Grenade

Notice that they look nearly identical to a standard issue tear gas canister. A SWAT team would have no problem procuring these.

This could also explain why the structure was so hot for so long. The spokeswoman kept repeating that the building was to hot to search late into the night. This would also explain why the fire trucks were held back. Someone else on ATS pointed out that water + thermite = bad news.

It also would be convienient, because there would be absolutley no evidence left over (besides thermite residue).

According to the information about these AN-M14's, they can be thrown up to 25 meters by a "standard soldier". Among the listed targets/uses is "structures".

I'm pretty darn sure this is what they were using.

I swear i remember reading that at one point someone tried to come out the back way but was pushed back in. I don't know if this was before or after the fire.
Anyone else remember hearing this? im going to have to look for the source.

reply to post by Bixxi3


pushed, in the context you used, implies somebody ran up and pushed him back inside. he came out shooting (according to reports) and the return fire forced him to retreat back inside the house. not exactly like he came out with his hands up and they shoved him back inside and locked the door on him.

Just my opinion, but I think the staging up the road, of a fire engine, says they had total knowledge going in that they intended to burn the cabin, with him in it. Multiple times the engine was told to stand down until the structure was collapsed. The officers commented on the integrity of the structure as it was taking a long time to burn.