{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/13/2013 9:34:09 PM
6
The manifesto is a confused mess of a conflicted man. Even assuming every single word of his manifesto is true (which at this time, we have only circumstantial evidence for his accusations), his ultimate action taken almost completely nullifies any point he was trying to make. He attacked officers who weren't involved and killed an officer named in his manifesto's daughter and her fiance.
He bemoans the state of bureaucracy and corruption that he claims led to his firing and disgrace, but when given the personal choice to rectify his wrongs in a humane manner, he instead murders innocent civilians and attacks officers because it suits his interest to do so, so that people will mistakenly believe him to be on their side and betray the common good of the people for some personal grandeur. Dorner and his supporters are, ironically, the type of hypocrite he accused people of in his manifesto.
English
-
Let me set this straight First of all, it is very likely that what he said in the 'manifesto' was true. A man of his original character would never reduce to killing his former co-workers because of a lie. That wouldn't make any sense, and Dorner was a smart man. Nobody would go this far on a lie. Second of all, his 'point' to make was exposing the LAPD's corruptness. Since you read it, then you should know that he didn't give a shit about sympathy, or any of that crap. The whole thing was set to get people into looking into the corruption of LAPD. As a matter of fact, Dorner said that he wouldn't be alive at the end of it all. Third of all, you don't know for certain that the wife and fiancé were killed by Dorner. We know the corruption of LAPD. They probably killed them by mistake or something, and claimed that Dorner sent a text message and all of that crap - even still, his methods were meant to be terroristic in order to get people to realize the corruption going on. You read the manifesto - you know what happened when he tried the legal route. There was no personal grandeur. Dorner said in his manifesto that he cared little to nothing about self preservation.
-
[quote]First of all, it is very likely that what he said in the 'manifesto' was true. [/quote]We have no way of knowing that without review. [quote]Since you read it, then you should know that he didn't give a shit about sympathy, or any of that crap. The whole thing was set to get people into looking into the corruption of LAPD.[/quote]I never claimed he wanted sympathy. [quote]Third of all, you don't know for certain that the wife and fiancé were killed by Dorner. We know the corruption of LAPD.[/quote]No, you're right. I don't. They will investigate his alleged crimes and if found guilty, this point stands. What we do know is he threatened the families of the officers, so he had reasonable intent. If we completely throw out the actions that led to this incident and focus on the rhetoric, he's still wrong. What is the point of trying to stand up for corruption against innocent people if you make it by shooting innocent people? We know he threatened these people and their families specifically. [quote]You read the manifesto - you know what happened when he tried the legal route. There was no personal grandeur. Dorner said in his manifesto that he cared little to nothing about self preservation.[/quote]He sees his actions as the only way because he believes he's above the corruption of the system. There's personal grandeur right there. There doesn't need to be a self-preservation instinct (which Dorner obviously has, and states he will fight and run with all of his knowledge) for it to be delusions of greater self-importance. He sees himself as a martyr-type figure who will expose light and reform a system with his actions. He will not. He will instead distract any real efforts of reform and impacting investigation by his insidious actions and threats.
-
The daughter and her husband were involved with the corruption, moron. And he had already tried to "rectify his wrongs" in a legal way.
-
No they weren't. There was nothing to state that they were. He explicitly threatened to kill the officer's families and clarified that they didn't know what type of people their family members were in the LAPD. You have no evidence, and even Dorner's manifesto contradicts that claim. Also, there is always an option besides killing people. He never was and never will be justified in his actions.
-
Yes they were. The daughter was 40 years old, and had covered up just as much as any other officer. And I don't need evidence when I have the truth.
-
[quote]And I don't need evidence when I have the truth.[/quote]And I don't have to listen to the depraved shock-tactics of a angsty teenager when I have the mute button.
