Decision to Blow up US Citizen With Robot Was Improvised in Less Than 20 Minutes

robot kills suspectBy Claire Bernish

A hotly-contested decision by law enforcement to use a drone robot to blow up a U.S. citizen, who allegedly carried out the murders of five police officers in Dallas, just got exponentially more controversial—because, according to Dallas Police Chief David Brown, the “whole idea was improvised in about 15 to 20 minutes.”

Already igniting fury around the country for neglecting any semblance of due process, the use of the “Remotec model F-5” to deliver a pound of C-4 explosive to decimate suspected shooter Micah Xavier Johnson as he targeted police in a sniper-style attack, has been revealed by the police chief as a hastily-plotted … whim.

Brown’s disturbing offhand comment came during a press conference in which the model of the “mechanical tactical drone”—clarified as the “Remotec Andros Mark V-A1″—was finally made public, in an apparent attempt to quell constitutional rights’ advocates ire over the unprecedented move by police.

While Johnson’s cold-blooded attack on random police officers in one of the most progressive and reform-minded forces in the country landed an official black mark in the annals of American history, the—as many advocates warn—egregious violation of his human and constitutional rights as the first U.S. citizen blown up in this manner earned police, themselves, a similarly notorious mark.

Obviously, the controversy doesn’t end with a model name—the drone isn’t the issue for most people outraged over its use; rather, the fact a citizen was bombed without so much as a nod of consideration for his human, civil, or constitutional rights that has people steamed.

As Daniel McAdams for the Ron Paul Institute keenly noted, following the now-apparent improvised and hasty decision by law enforcement to explode Johnson:

The media and opinion leaders are presenting us with a false choice: if we question the use of drones to kill Americans—even if we suspect they have done very bad things—we somehow do not care about the lives of police officers. That is not the case. It is perfectly possible to not want police officers to be killed in the line of duty but to wholeheartedly reject the idea of authorities using drones to remotely kill Americans before they are found guilty.

Noting police originally suspected a different person altogether of perpetrating the attacks, McAdams implored the country to consider the ramifications of setting such a precedent—and, considering the disclosure of the nearly impromptu decision to use this drone, that warning should be an imperative.

Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!

Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!

Perhaps we all need to familiarize ourselves with this drone’s mechanics now that this dystopic precedent has been set.

Manufactured by the military-industrial complex’s darling, Northrop Grumman, this tactical robot “is driven by a human via remote control, weighs 790 pounds and has a top speed of 3.5 mph,” as the Washington Post described. “It carries a camera with a 26x optical zoom and 12x digital zoom. When its arm is fully extended, it can lift a 60-pound weight. The ‘hand’ at the end of the arm can apply a grip of about 50 pounds of force.”

Interestingly enough, the $151,000 tactical robot provided a far more life-affirming service just one year ago.

According to Metro UK, the same model once assisted the California Highway Patrol when negotiations with a man threatening to kill himself by jumping from a San Jose overpass failed—by delivering a pizza.

Technological advancement, though overwhelmingly positive, is only as beneficent as those who put it to use—and how they choose to employ it.

In just one year, a pizza-delivering robot with the potential to save human life during bomb threats or similar situations became a casually-deployed, due process-stripping weapon of war against a U.S. citizen.

It would be prudent we take more than just a minute to critically consider that.

This article (Decision to Blow up US Citizen With Robot Was Improvised in Less Than 20 Minutes) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email [email protected].

Image Credit


Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

93 Comments on "Decision to Blow up US Citizen With Robot Was Improvised in Less Than 20 Minutes"

  1. Mick McNulty | July 13, 2016 at 10:10 am | Reply

    A few more targeted assassinations like this to condition the public then the totalitarians will be confident enough to send out aerial drones. Then the target list gets long, from “known terrorists” on files we can’t see for national security reasons, to alternative news bloggers for “inciting sedition”. Sieg Heil!

    • Edwin Alexander | July 13, 2016 at 1:23 pm | Reply

      HAHAHAHA Think much, he was a criminal and a murderer, I also hope the Robot was OK afterwards..

      • Were you there?

        No.

        So, you are simply parroting what your TV has told you, aren’t you.

        How do you know they got the right person? How do you know there was enough certainty that he was the right person?

        You don’t.

        Wouldn’t it be great if we had some kind of court or something where evidence of a crime can be presented, and people accused of a crime can offer a defense, and then people can make an informed decision regarding the guilt of that person, and decide on an appropriate punishment?

        The thing about being brainwashed, is you are brainwashed to not know you are being brainwashed.

        • Did they get anyone?

        • It doesn’t matter if he’s the one who killed the people earlier, as you don’t have to be guilty to be lawfully arrested on suspicion of a felony, but what does matter is that he was resisting a lawful arrest by using lethal weapons against the arresting officers, and that’s what makes a decision to kill him legitimate. Did they consider nonlethal options? Probably, but they likely would’ve put more innocent people in harms way by choosing that option. We weren’t there, but the officers were, so until there’s some evidence of impropriety there is no reason to second guess their decision.

          • The importance of due process is obviously beyond you.
            Question: What percentage of people in the police force are?:
            a) corrupt
            b) psychopaths
            c) criminals
            d) low IQ
            Even if you think the total of all these is quite low, there is no way to know if they got the right guy unless due process is followed.

          • This guy was ACTIVELY resisting arrest using lethal force. They knew with virtual certainty that they had the guy who was resisting arrest with such force. Whether he’s the same guy who killed people earlier is essentially irrelevant.

            We don’t require that any other citizen get court approval before using lethal force in defense of themselves. There’s no reason police would have attenuated rights in this regard just because they’re effectuating an arrest on our behalf.

          • Again – how do you know that? Were you there?
            If not, then you are simply parotting what your TV has told you.
            How does the TV know? Were they there?
            Possibly, but with most of these news stories, they are not there. They are given the story by the POLICE.
            And given how the media have shown just how corrupt and untruthful they can be during this latest election cycle, just how naive do you have to be to still believe ANYTHING they say?

          • Sure police can lie, but they tend not to lie as often, and they tend not to lie when it’s a large group of them who were there witnessing the same thing.

            If you’re that convinced the police are lying about everything what makes you even think they killed someone? They could be making up that too. The fact is most people consider the testimony of an average law enforcement officer to be at least as credible as a random person off the street (and in most cases this is well justified.)

            The only people whose opinions of the police’s credibility really count in the end are the grand jury that oversees the jurisdiction. If they believe the evidence that the police officers had a reasonable belief that their life was being put in danger by this person as they were attempting to arrest him then there are no charges. THAT is the only time that courtroom ‘due process’ comes into play.

            Until you can present some evidence that the police are lying IN THIS INSTANCE then reasonable people will tend to take the word of those who were there (as fallible and human though they may be.)

          • You have just illustrated exactly why due processes is important.

          • Which is why due process is afforded when it’s possible to do so without getting innocent people killed in the process. The police tried for hours to effectuate the arrest and give this guy his due process rights, it was his choice not to.

          • How terrible – all that donut eating time wasted!

          • Time wasted isn’t that big of a deal, but it does show that this guy was afforded every reasonable opportunity to be arrested and receive his due process.

          • DWS – Most Americans Are Products of the Boob Tube TV Programming.

          • L. A. McDonough | July 14, 2016 at 11:30 am |

            There are some good decent cops, lots of phony ones too. But that guy was a racist wanting to kill white cops. I’m sick and tired of these jihadists to incl home grown, killing for sport.

        • L. A. McDonough | July 14, 2016 at 11:29 am | Reply

          Cops were doing the robot act for their safety. You sound like you are for cop killers, like that pc of filthy scum, who was a likely jihadist. Get a life you jerk.

    • I happened to notice this morning that Israeli trained cops have designated “Black Lives
      Matter” a terrorist group.

      Taking into account how treasonous our Israeli trained cops are, dual citizen ‘owned” DHS
      expanding it’s power by creating Domestic terrorist labels, the NDAA
      passed by the dual citizen-run SCOTUS allowing murder of citizens w/o
      due process, endless detention, refusal of access to legal
      representation etc. ad nauseum, you all might want to watch things
      closely as concerns demonstrations against this corrupted and dual
      citizen run government.

      Shall we create a
      “scenario”?

      An upset group of people begin to legally demonstrate, some MOSSAD/CIA/FBI/DEA/NSA “assets”
      covertly and under cover of L.E. Committ “random” crimial acts and the occupying military
      formerly called “Cops” annihilate said group of demonstrators as
      “domestic terrorists”. Soon, I feel these acts will be carried
      out LEGALLY by DHS’s “Youth First Responders”, (NEO CHEKA), after
      their indoctrination by dual citizens or their appointees. I wonder
      if their curriculum will include the teaching of constitutional
      rights/protections or just the “evils” of holocaust denial, foul
      antiSemites and their perrenial “vicitmhood”?

      Conspiracy nut? Not hardly.
      It was proven many times, the cops, waay back then – (’60’s/’70’s)
      would plant boot-licking weenies in peaceful demonstrations, cause
      violence through acts of vandalism etc. and their “loverboys”
      would move in and crush same. Also… Remember the USS
      Liberty/9/11/Operation North Woods. As for the treachery of dual
      citizens? 2 words; Jonathan Pollard.

  2. The most interesting aspect of this is how many DUHmericans think it was a good idea.

    • Anytime BLM people are blown up, its good idea

      • Busdriver Bill | July 13, 2016 at 5:07 pm | Reply

        Let’s see, hmmm, BLM used to refer to Bureau of Land Management. But I think you refer to some militant terrorist group – separatist in nature – regarding a single race above the rest, right? Who ARE the racists in today’s world? The PC feel good folks, who can’t stand anybody who thinks for himself?
        No, most of these silly band waggoneers are just fools.

    • There’s no such right to due process when you’re currently in the commission of a felony. That occurs only after the fact, and they want to arrest, charge, and imprison/execute you for that. While you’re in the active commission of a crime, all bets are off.

    • That is very unsettling!! Is this NDAA in action?? I am thinking it might be.

      • No, police have always been allowed to kill someone who is committing a violent felony and who is resisting arrest with lethal force. This is not new or even particularly controversial, but people are getting all bent out of shape based on the mechanism which isn’t really relevant legally or morally.

        • TRANSLATION: Police have always been allowed to kill indiscriminately whenever their feelings get hurt and never have to face any consequences, so we peasants should be overjoyed that we can now be killed by robots without feelings. Got it.

          • This scumbag wasn’t killed ‘by a robot without feelings’, he was killed by a flesh and blood police officer operating a robot by remote control, and if you think that killing a felony suspect who is resisting a lawful arrest by lethal force counts as ‘indiscriminate’ you need to go back to elementary school.

          • knifemare69 | July 13, 2016 at 2:32 pm |

            Another dumbass government troll who never read the constitution. Move to North Korea if you want to push that ‘big government is always right’ bullcrap. You obviously don’t deserve to live in a free country so LEAVE! I’ll help you pack from your mother’s basement…

          • Lol, talk about strawman… How arguing that the use of lethal force during a felony arrest of a person who is trying to murder the arresting officers (of the local city police department) is in-fact lawful counts as ‘big government is always right’ is beyond me, but assuming you’ve actually read the constitution (which I doubt,) which part would you say requires that murderers be allowed to remain free or that officers sacrifice their lives to try to arrest them without using lethal force? (Hint: It’s not in there, but I’m curious what part you think applies.)

          • knifemare69 | July 14, 2016 at 11:23 am |

            As soon as you point out the part of the Constitution that says law enforcement must be obeyed at the penalty of death; otherwise STFU you anti-American piece of garbage government troll

          • You moron, the U.S. Constitution enumerates authority delegated to the federal government by the states. It doesn’t give the states their police power, and someone’s right to kill someone else who is trying to murder them predates even the state constitutions.

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 5:48 pm |

            um the Constitution IS the law of the land.. you may now crawl back and lick your masters boots

          • Umm, clearly you don’t have much in the way of legal education or knowledge. While the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law with regard to specific enumerated powers delegated by the federal government, the supremacy clause does NOT give the federal government authority that’s not delegated to it by the states. With regard to virtually everything that affects day to day life and routine criminal law it’s the state constitutions and relevant statutes derived therefrom that are controlling, and some of those predate the U.S. Constitution and were in no way superceded by it. Those of us not in Washington D.C. live under a dual sovereignty system and have since the nation was formed (and for someone who claims to resist tyranny you sure do have an unrealistically centralized and dictatorial interpretation of the relationship between the states and Federal government.)

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 7:12 pm |

            Well you’re quite the little boot licking statist aren’t you! Would it be fair to state that you believe that the state constitutions and laws/statutes/codes/policies automatically apply to everyone simply because of their physical location within what is commonly called a state, would that be right??

          • If that’s what believing in rule of law makes me then so be it. Of course entering a sovereign state puts you under its police power. That is pretty much the definition of a state. It’s not a f-ing voluntary club.

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 7:48 pm |

            hmm entering a sovereign state puts you under its police power??

            Is the application of law arbitrary and capricious, or just a belief in magic??
            would you like to show everyone what facts you rely on that proves the laws apply to someone simply because of their physically being within a given geographic area commonly called a state?

            Remember, we want your FACTS, not your feelings, beliefs, opinions or the feelings, beliefs or opinions of others..just facts! Not hearsay, hearsay of hearsay, rumor, speculation, assumptions, presumptions, hypotheticals, conjecture, sophistry, obfuscation, scenarios, what if’s, fraud or lies.
            Nor any historical document that doesn’t have the wet ink signature of anyone being charged. Nor any document that is compulsory,.. threats, duress and coercion to accept a compulsory document, nullifies any implied acceptance or acquiescence to be ruled/controlled! Well, unless you endorse slavery. You don’t endorse slavery, do you??
            Further; You shall not invoke laws, statutes, codes, policies, treaties, etc, or any Constitution or any amendments to any Constitution, as that presupposes that any of it is applicable, when that is what is in question in the first place!

            Good luck!

          • Well sure, there’s always going to be a certain amount of arbitrariness about it, as the creator of the universe isn’t down here on earth dictating our daily affairs…

            It’s quite clear when the law applies, as it is spelled out in the statutes and case law, and enforced by the guys with the guns…

            If you don’t like rule of law then move to the deepest darkest part of Africa and become a warlord. Those of us with above a room temp IQ will take the dramatically improved standard of living that comes with the rule of law.

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 10:17 pm |

            so you can’t actually prove it applies nor do you have any evidence, other than spouting platitudes and your less than worthless opinion.
            it’s odd that ALL statists always fall back to the “if you don’t like our PRETENDED laws, leave” routine.. when challenged to provide proof of applicability!
            Nice fail, boot licker!

          • They apply because the laws themselves say that they apply and because of the men with guns who forcibly apply it. What the f-ck else would you accept as ‘proof’? (It’s not like God’s going to come down here and stamp them with ‘applies’ in bright red ink.)

          • When they killed this guy was he in the process of killing? Did these LEO’s actually see this one guy killing people? Does it matter he was pretty much ruined by our own military…?

          • He was in the process of trying to murder the LEOs trying to effectuate the arrest. Yes, they definitively identified the guy as the one trying to murder the LEOs who were trying to arrest him, by the scumbag’s own direct and clear admissions. No, the fact that he was messed up in the head from being in the military and being a henchman for big business doesn’t make one bit of difference. (The fact that he also murdered a bunch of people earlier in the day isn’t a directly relevant factor.)

          • Is it so tough to capture live than kill? Guess so…? We weren’t there. We are supposed to believe the media?

          • Yes, capturing someone who is shooting at you is a lot harder than killing them…

            You’re right, we weren’t there, so we should believe those who were unless some evidence indicates they aren’t being truthful.

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 5:50 pm |

            why wait, just kill them, right?? it should happen to someone you care about.. but then again, a statist’s god, the government can do no wrong!

          • Why wait? Because I, like most responsible individuals, are overwhelmingly likely to be successful in preventing any mentally deranged family members from putting someone else in reasonable apprehension of serious injury or death.

            Your statement is just about as idiotic as saying ‘why wait for certain individuals to become murderers when we can just kill all babies when they’re born?’… Gee, hmm, that’s a tough one (not.)

          • berrybestfarm | July 13, 2016 at 4:58 pm |

            It absolutely matters if he was not of sound mind. That is what juries are for.

          • No, it actually doesn’t matter, not at all, and whether someone is mentally ill and shooting at officers or completely sane and evil the officer’s duty to apprehend and protect the public, and their right to self defense up to and including lethal force, is exactly the same. Nice try though.

          • berrybestfarm | July 13, 2016 at 5:12 pm |

            Remember that when one of your loved ones gets old and starts to lose their mind. Hope the police don’t shoot them for wandering in a threatening manner.

          • Yeah because I love them I guess I’ll just have to keep my firearms away from any loved ones with mental illness or who have the mental faculties of a child…

            If they are so off their rocker they’re liable to attack someone then I’ll certainly do everything I can to keep them from ‘wandering off’ and putting themselves and others in danger. This is not new.

          • desertspeaks | July 14, 2016 at 5:49 pm |

            you’re a pathological liar! you have no such evidence!

          • The LEOs’ statements as eyewitnesses are evidence and until someone can provide alternative evidence to suggest that they are lying the police are who I (and most reasonable Americans) will tend to believe.

  3. they had to blow him up to eliminate evidence to the fact that it was just a body and the whole thing may have been a false flag so oboma could once again claim the need for gun control and further the divide between races to bring us closer to martial law.

  4. rhondareichel | July 13, 2016 at 10:23 am | Reply

    Not good….they could have waited him out. I would have wanted him alive to be questioned. Looks like a coverup or a false flag now.

    • Police don’t have to ‘wait someone out’. The police decide the timetable, and if he’s still resisting with lethal force when they want things to end then he dies.

      I wouldn’t be surprised about the false flag scenario turning out to be true, so I would like to see investigated who made the decision to use the robot. As long as a reasonable person could’ve concluded that he was continuing to project lethal force to resist arrest then it’s all above board.

  5. Alphabet_Soup | July 13, 2016 at 11:04 am | Reply

    I just hope that the robot wasn’t damaged…

  6. There is no evidence that the “robot bombing” ever happened.

    • Well, the police and the media says otherwise.Knowing how truthful these two are the sheeple must believe the story…

  7. Johnny Thorne | July 13, 2016 at 11:11 am | Reply

    More robots less crime. Democrats love to kill blacks, preferably before they are born, however.

  8. ScroodeMcDuck | July 13, 2016 at 11:19 am | Reply

    MURDER without a trial ! This CANNOT be justified in any way ! Sleeping gas is not an option ? We are sliding down slope to absolute serfdom and totalitarianism.

    • There’s no such right to due process when you’re currently in the commission of a felony. That occurs only after the fact, and they want to arrest, charge, and imprison/execute you for that. While you’re in the active commission of a crime, all bets are off

      Learn!!

      • It’s amazing how many people think that an active shooter deserves full courtroom due process protections plus appellate review… F-ing retards.

      • ScroodeMcDuck | July 13, 2016 at 9:54 pm | Reply

        You are not an American with that point of view !! Read my response to the idiot Jo Peter below you are in the same category ! A Fascist Pig !!

    • One more time.

      There’s no such right to due process when you’re currently in the commission of a felony. That occurs only after the fact, and they want to arrest, charge, and imprison/execute you for that. While you’re in the active commission of a crime, all bets are off.

  9. No different than giving a sniper the shoot order.

    • ScroodeMcDuck | July 13, 2016 at 10:07 pm | Reply

      That is what They ( The Hierarchy Enslaving You ) want you to think ! Snipers are “military” ( not peace officers ) against civilian and that is expressly prohibited by the Articles of Confederation, The Constitution and the Bill Of Rights !!

  10. Ralph Sinamon | July 13, 2016 at 11:35 am | Reply

    Guilty until proven innocent! It is everyone’s RIGHT! The exploded guy would never have been proven innocent, therefore he was guilty. There would have been more innocent blood had not this method been chosen. The reasoning is virtually identical to the use of nuclear devices to end WWll. It was brilliant and as long as it is used only on those we know are 100% guilty, I am good with it. I do believe that some, if not all, of these shootings are false-flag op’s. I’m inclined to think this was not a false flag op.

    • “I’m inclined to think this was not a false flag op.”

      Funny, this has ALL the hallmarks of a false flag op:

      1) Story changes overnight from multiple shooters in custody to just one shooter
      2) Attack only HELPED the criminal establishment by distracting from politician corruption and giving a platform to push gun control
      3) Shooter was ex military like Tim McVeigh, who also supposedly ‘turned’ against the government
      4) Nothing but grainy camera footage that makes it impossible to identify the shooter in the act
      5) Mass shooter drills were held 40 miles north of Dallas barely 8 days before the attack
      6) Nobody explains how a guy with a semi-auto rifle designed in 1943 can hold off the entire Dallas PD who have full auto weapons and flash bang grenades

      I’m sorry – this story has more holes than Bill Clinton’s concubines…

      • Ralph Sinamon | July 13, 2016 at 3:38 pm | Reply

        There are enough facts mixed in with the fiction to confuse anybody. What you responded with tends to get me rethinking my own statement. This crap is probably going to result in the shooting war that Obama is trying to foment. The ignorance that is routinely displayed by the supporters of Obama and his ilk suggests that ARE people willing to fire upon those that aren’t on the Left.

  11. As usual, no forensic analysis or ballistic tests required now. No proof will be presented that shows this guy shot anyone. All that remains is the government’s and the media’s word on it. And I trust them as far as I can throw an elephant.

  12. One more thing, who supplied the C-4? Is this something all police departments have lying around now?

    • Bomb squads always have it to detonate bombs they find. The means were already on hand, so the choice was take him out with a bullet, or take him out with a bomb, and the bomb put officers lives at less risk so was a not entirely unreasonable choice.

  13. It’s obvious many here have never been put into a life threatening combat situation, almost guaranteed they never defended their Country and never will.

  14. Legally and morally there is no difference between the remote detonated block of C4 and a sniper bullet to this dirtbag’s head… He wasn’t killed for the murders he had already committed, he was killed to prevent the murders he would’ve committed during the course of arresting him, and a suspect’s ongoing and deliberate resistance by lethal force to lawful arrest is one scenario under which the police are 100% justified in killing the f-cker.

    • You don’t recognize brainwashing of your own self? Again, police shouldn’t be in the position of being judge, jury, executioner!! Don’t we have plenty of technology to incapacitate not kill? All we know is what the media tells us and I for one am so skeptical I won’t believe a single word from the media. You are reiterating the very rationale the cops have to use to kill…and live with their decisions.

      • Legally and morally every single American has the moral and legal authority to be ‘judge, jury, and executioner’ to someone actively trying to kill them… The only difference is that the police also have a duty to arrest this murderer. When their natural right to self defense is combined with their duty to apprehend then yes, they, of their own accord, can choose to take a violently resisting felon’s life, with no court decisions and no appeals. If you don’t like it then move to the darkest Africa or someplace else where they cannot enforce rule of law, but here we don’t treat active shooters with kid gloves.

    • ScroodeMcDuck | July 13, 2016 at 10:09 pm | Reply

      Criminal procedural due process
      In criminal cases, many of these due process protections overlap with procedural protections provided by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution,
      which guarantees reliable procedures that protect innocent people from
      being executed, which would be an obvious example of cruel and unusual
      punishment.[21] NOBODY IS GUILTY BEFORE A TRIAL !!

      • This guy wasn’t executed because of any crime that he had committed, and his guilt or innocent was irrelevant. He was killed for his ongoing use of lethal force to resist a lawful felony arrest. There was no ‘criminal case’ yet and thus no ‘procedural’ protections of any kind. Any American citizen is legally and morally permitted to intentionally kill someone who is actively trying to murder them, and these officers of course retained this natural right even as they fulfilled their duty to apprehend this felony suspect.

      • I’m sick of reading your “IT’S IN DA CONSTITUTION” crap. No one cares anymore, those who hold power, that is. People like YOU, the hoi polloi, are never considered as TPTB do their thing. The constitution is a dead critter corpse of yesteryear’s ideologies; killed by the apathetic, the idiots who believe known liars, the gullible who believe lollipops come from Skittle clouds, the cowardly who crap themselves at the prospect of responsibility for self, and the nobodies who will go to their graves as nobodies . If there ever were ‘constitutional freedoms’ they are long since vanished under the concept of tyranny of the masses of moral busybodies who make a point to life of running YOUR life…

        You will never see another ‘free’ society again. There will not even be a half-hearted attempt at it, even.

        • ScroodeMcDuck | July 14, 2016 at 6:26 pm | Reply

          Unfortunately I have to concede that what you state is accurate and correct…nobody cares anymore and we are probably past the point of no return ! I get to watch all the nobodies nash teeth in the future and call to kill because of anger caused by their own ignorant shortfalls. Touchet !

  15. Do not fool yourself,It was a drill…

  16. desertspeaks | July 13, 2016 at 3:57 pm | Reply

    hmm i can’t seem to locate where blowing up a suspect is part of DUE PROCESS in the Constitution, can someone point that out for everyone??

  17. United Police States | July 13, 2016 at 7:04 pm | Reply

    The entire Dallas story is just more fake bullshit made up by the corrupt criminal system. I doubt there were actually any police killed. I would guess the shooter was duped into being there, a patsy, probably hired by the US government and probably thought he was helping to “fight terrorism”. That is if there even was a shooter killed, that may have been more made up bullshit. I’m sure the robot story is just more bullshit.

    1) To take away our guns.
    2) To stir up more racial hatred.
    3) To continue the divide and conquer agenda.
    4) To give the police an excuse to crack down violently on peaceful protesters.
    5) The start of police wearing “riot gear” during peaceful protests.
    6) God only knows what else.

    At this point I am trying to figure out a way to escape from the United States before it’s too late and national martial law in declared over their fake bullshit.

  18. Louis Charles | July 14, 2016 at 12:03 am | Reply

    Imagine “wacoHellary” with an unlimited supply of these things at her fingertips. America under that sick psychobitch = HUNGER GAMES!

  19. Take all of this robot business with a grain of salt. They will have us believe that on the spur of the moment, they made the decision to place a $150,000 robot in an enclosed parking garage and detonated the C4 explosives it was holding. All the while they’re completely oblivious to the structural damage this might cause, and the ensuing threat to the well-being of police officers and private vehicles should the garage collapse. There are many other holes in the official story, but this one by far takes the prize. So before we even approach this incident from the standpoint of its constitutionality, Chief Brown needs to convincingly explain to the American people the nuts and bolts of this alleged action. Jeez, maybe this is why those two sorry excuses for an American president were so engulfed in sophomoric laughter at the Dallas memorial service on Tuesday, at a time when somberness and reflection should have been the order of the day. They know the sheeple will buy anything (and apparently have again).

  20. Terminator here we…go.Next up – day of rage.
    Don’t go out tonight it’s bound to take your life…CCR circa 1969.

  21. This is merely a feeble attempt to make Veterans crazy and disarm them. Remember the Veterans are the Nations last line of defense. How is it that some mentally unstable Army Failure with 8 weeks of Basic training is badder than the Dallas Police force. Now consider the weapon and the continued claim of sniper. SKS, 7.62 x 39, more commonly refereed to as the pray and spray

  22. Just block that idiot ( Jo Peter) . I did and have not missed a single intelligent comment yet. There is no profit in the reading of useless and uninformed opinions.

    Just remember, Stormy, that nothing you read or see on ‘da news’ is sincerely true with an eye toward honesty or a heart that values integrity. Before it was just disingenuous, now they are actively using propaganda and structured deceptions. This happens right before the end.

    • Well, thank you, Pyra! I kinda like to take idiots on for a bit. There is a reason they are on sites like these. Some are bonafide trolls, others are fighting their own demons and part of them knows that they should be paying attention. Anyhoo, you should get to know me a bit better. I am not affected by DA NEWS, grins! I have my own foundation of tested, trusted information with which I filter everything. But to watch ‘actors’ acting during a well publicised massacre, no bodies, no blood, confusion up the yingyang for how many shooters, other killers across the country that were connected and then watching these actors…I’ve found lots of entertainment when watching main stream. Can read between the lines. Love to hear others thoughts and keep checking my foundation for errors.

  23. Police are not monolithic in this country. In some jurisdictions they may be like that, but it’s not universal. Police corruption tends to mirror wider societal corruption (so yeah, police lie more often now, but so does everyone else.)

  24. ScroodeMcDuck | July 15, 2016 at 9:13 pm | Reply

    What you are quoting is a “Statute” or “Code” which is not law ! It is FALSELY and incorrectly called a law. The supreme “LAW” of the Land is still the Constitution until further notice !! You should educate yourself on the Founding Documents instead of listening to the Lemmings and Parrots. ( or being one either ! ) You are giving statutes the equality of law and that is opposed to the Constitution. Laws are passed only by Congress not the Federal Government or any other body. A true American would not Murder without a trial and using a Bomb like that is NOT self-defense.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*