Category Archives: Voluntarism

Libertarian Party statement on Boston Marathon bombing, Syria, foreign intervention


lpLibertarian Party statement on Boston Marathon bombing, Syria, foreign intervention

The Libertarian Party extends heartfelt sympathies to the surviving families of the victims and all who were harmed by the senseless and violent bombing in Boston on April 15 and its aftermath. We applaud the efforts of Boston-area residents and law enforcement officials who helped to remove the immediate threat of additional harm from the alleged perpetrators.

While we are relieved that the Justice Department has assured that the surviving bombing suspect will receive a civilian trial, we are troubled that, according to news reports, he was not read his Miranda rights prior to questioning. Regardless of the severity of the crime, upholding individual rights is paramount. We call for ensuring that all criminal suspects, including alleged terrorists, are Mirandized and offered the right to an attorney before questioning. We also call for ensuring that all such interrogations be, without exception, properly monitored and videotaped.

We are further troubled by reports of martial law tactics, including the alleged orders issued by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick for residents to stay inside their homes and for stores to stay closed. Visiting homes to inquire of suspect sightings or politely requesting that residents stay off the streets — without any threat of force — is a reasonable measure for authorities to take during an emergency. However, threatening force in any way is a breach of our constitutional rights and is unacceptable. Going forward, we call for laws that impose criminal penalties on any government official who oversteps his or her authority or who in any way diminishes our constitutional protections.

While we strenuously condemn acts of violence against innocent men, women, and children as occurred on April 17, we also condemn the U.S. government’s routine perpetration of such injustice on others throughout the world. As one example, U.S. drone strikes kill many times more civilians than terrorists.

Such disregard for human life is morally reprehensible. In addition, it unnecessarily engenders enemies of the United States.

Spokespersons for the military claim that the federal government does whatever it can to minimize civilian casualties. Perhaps it does from their current perspective. But from an honest and realistic perspective, their perpetual calls for military action do not minimize civilian casualties, but instead increase them.

To avoid harming innocent others, the Libertarian Party urges President Barack Obama and members of Congress to:

Stay out of foreign conflicts, including Syria. The goal of our military should be defense only, not attempting to brutalize the world into acceptance of our cultural values, to impose “democracy” (its practice in U.S. elections leaves much to be desired), to control foreign resources, or to intervene for other purposes.
Immediately end all trade sanctions, including sanctions against Iran and North Korea. Sanctions all too often end in war, as was the case in Iraq. They furthermore disrupt the peaceful influence of international businessmen and women who have every incentive to avoid war and violence.
Begin to shut down the vast majority of our foreign military bases and bring our troops home. Our wealthy allies can pay for their own defense, and our military bases in less friendly areas serve to create more enemies.
Immediately end all military alliances, including those associated with NATO. The Cold War is over. We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy every country on earth. No country can reasonably declare war on the United States. The kind of terrorism we deal with cannot be addressed by massive military alliances. If a threat were to arise large enough to require an allied force to fight it off, we can create a new alliance at that time.
Immediately reduce military spending by 60 percent or more. When companies like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrup Grumman profit from war, they have a powerful incentive to use their influence to encourage military conflict. Canceling multi-billion-dollar contracts for unneeded fighter planes, ships, and other military equipment will reduce the incentive to lobby for military adventurism. Associated cuts in government spending will reduce the deficit, reduce inflation, and stimulate the private sector economy, creating job growth.

“The United States’ vast military arsenal is much too big, wildly overpriced, and morally unjustifiable. In addition, high government spending to fund the military contributes significantly to inflation and the risk of an economic collapse,” said Geoffrey J. Neale, chair of the Libertarian National Committee. “By dramatically reducing military spending and adopting a noninterventionist foreign policy, we will foster peace throughout the world, preserve Americans’ wealth, and make America safe.”


Boston, Martial Law, and False Flags


cons I know -I know – don’t blog on these kinds of things or you’ll be looked at like a “conspiracy theorist” and you’ll “lose credibility”.  Let me be clear.  I am not one of those people who thinks that actors were staged in the streets of Boston pretending to be blown to bits.  I believe the bombing happened.  My condolences and prayers go out to the victims and the families of the victims.
I think what happened in Boston was horrible but what happened in Boston to our constitution was tragic.  Why are people so willing to give up their liberties for the sake of security?  Since when did American’s allow their government “rescue them at gunpoint”?  Many evacuated residents (people who cheered as the police left) didn’t even know that the real hero was just a resident who was outside smoking a cigarette when he noticed something “off”.  The police weren’t even responsible for finding the second suspect.

Pool of blood from suspect #1

People were probably cheering because the cops were finally leaving I know I would. My biggest issue since this event happened is how the police reacted to the whole situation. I watched people be removed from their homes at gunpoint on Youtube.  I listened to a woman’s chilling call into a radio station where she claimed that there was no “bomb” and that the first suspect was ‘run over by police’.  I’ve seen footage of the “shootout scene” by people who live in Watertown, MA that included large pool of blood and bloody smudge marks.

  • Police did not prevent either bomb
  • Police didn’t find the second suspect
  • Police did not uphold the United States Constitution

And then there was this:
According to the timeline I was following online during the attack “The Red Sox officially postponed tonight’s game at Fenway Park scheduled for 7:10 p.m. “to support efforts of law enforcement officers.” The make-up date has yet to be scheduled. The Bruins game and Big Apple Circus performance scheduled for tonight have been postponed, as well, according to Boston Police.” Wow.
What is a False Flag?  False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them. Operations carried during peace-time by civilian organizations, as well as covert government agencies, may by extension be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organization behind an operation.
Do I think the police were behind it?  No.  I do however think at this point that there might have been warning signs since local news reports now confirm that the mother of the suspect was on the FBI terror watch list in 2011.  It makes me wonder if they couldn’t have done more to prevent it from happening in the first place! Did officials allow this to happen to test martial law?  Time will tell.
I just don’t know about the reports that were aired.  There have been so many inconsistencies with the reporting of the Boston bombings it’s hard to discern what is fact from fiction! Like millions of Americans across the country I was glued to the television and watched Martial Law unfold  in Boston. What I heard the news report saying was alarming. How can police “rescue” people at the point of a gun?

The following was not aired on television.

Then we had ABC News Martha Raddatz  on television, live, comparing the streets of America to war torn countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan. In my opinion comparing what happened in Boston to Iraq and Afghanistan is like comparing apples to oranges.  What happened in Boston could be comparable to what happens in Israel with the suicide bombings but no where near comparable to the illegal wars that continue to take place in Iraq and Afghanistan. I also noticed that Martha didn’t talk about the people America killed in Afghanistan that day.

  • America has not been leveled by bombs dropped from war planes.
  • America has not been “carpet bombed”.
  • America has not been ‘invaded’.
  • America is not a “war zone”.

I listened ABC News reports and what I heard over and over was “controlled explosions by  Snapshot - 34the police”.  I found a video online with evidence of this but the guy deleted it (good thing I have a copy of it huh). And since when do we use the military for police actions? Was the Boston Police Department so weak that they had to call them in for backup? Were they, as Alex Jones claims on Infowars.com a “False Flag Attack”?  We have yet to see the alleged surviving “bomber” but he is already being held in a federal prison according to ABC News.
What about the second bomb?  Where is the footage showing these guys dropping that bomb? Why is anyone who has questions about this considered a “conspiracy theorist”? When we are fed conflicting sound bites from the television and told “not to look at any other suspect than the ones that the FBI identified” it’s hard not to.  I hope that the FBI can show us the alleged bombers setting the bomb down on video to stop the rumor mill.  I am unhappy that my fellow American’s were  looking down the barrel of a government gun in the name of  “security” and suggest that law enforcement figure out another way. I pray that no other community is terrorized in such a way in the future.


Should the City of Cedar Rapids Fine People who feed Geese?



Please answer this poll!

Snapshot - 2

KCRG Story click here


Modern Day Alamo FREE TEXAS


April 21, 1836 -is the most important date in Texas history.  San Jancinto Day  is a state holiday and a day that has been reenacted for the last seventeen years at the San Jacinto Battleground State Historic Site in La Porte, just east of Houston.  This reenactment is the largest in Texas.
Having lived between Texas and Iowa throughout my childhood I have always consider myself ‘part Texan’. I attended 4th grade at Nolanville Elementary in Central Texas during the Cold War in the 80s. This was a time of great tension between the United States and the USSR.
free texasloveOrganizers of the 2013 festivities have “nixed” the Texas Nationalist Movement presentation at San Jancinto Day festivities.  The movement in Texas that has been working towards succeeding from United States of America. Organizers of the festival have also denied the Texas Nationalist Movement a booth to disseminate their materials because they are “too political”.  When I heard about this decision the Texan inside me became outraged! It would seem to me that these festival organizers would want to embrace the Texas Nationalist Movement and their message because they portray the very spirit that San Jancinto Day celebrates!
Aren’t these festivities held in a public place funded by public money? Is this public money not some how funneled to the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department and their  San Jancinto Day organizers by politicians?  I don’t want to seem petty but I would like to know!  Additionally, why are the festivities  being held a day early, on Hitler’s birthday, instead of the date in which it was declared a state holiday, April 21.
I fully support my friends and family in Texas who are ready to break free from this tyrannical government. I get it. I hope that the Texas Nationalist Movement is successful so other states may follow suit. Succeeding from the United States of America is the right thing for Texas to do.The loss of our sovereignty to move towards a “one world government” is not the way our founders envisioned America! Texas could be a beacon of hope for the rest of our country.
Don’t think Texas is tyrannical?  Ask parents of the  12-year-old girls who were forcefully vaccinated for HPV against their will and without parental permission how they feel. I couldn’t imagine what my mother  would have done if the school would have tried to give me a shot to vaccinate me for a sexually transmitted disease before I ever became sexually active!  When I attended Nolanville Elementary my teacher threatened to spank me  with a paddle for  losing my book .  I told my  mother I lost the book and that the teacher threatened to paddle my behind if I didn’t find it.  She went to the school and confronted the teacher and she told him if he ever talked to me that way again that she would beat him with a paddle herself.  Those were the days.
Texans fought and won the battle of the Texas Revolution becoming an independent Republic.  In 1845 it joined the United States as the 28th state. The state’s annexation set off a chain of events that caused the Mexican–American War in 1846.  In my opinion, denying  the Texas Nationalist Movement the opportunity to distribute their information goes against everything that the holiday stands for.  Independence is deeply ingrained in the character of the people of Texas and I hope that the  Texas Parks& Wildlife Department and their “festival organizers” will reconsider allowing the Texas Nationalist Movement to give their presentation.  I also hope that the organizers will allow Texas Nationalist Movement a booth at the San Jancinto Day festivities so that they may express the freedom that is being celebrated.


Iowa Drone Update


From: Ajai Dittmar~https://cedarrapidsactivist.wordpress.com/ [mailto:sibzianna@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 1:40 PM
To: Hogg, Rob [LEGIS]
Subject:

Where do you stand on the drone issue? We don’t want any drones over us!
hogg

Wed, Mar 6, 2013 3:16 pm
RE:
From Hogg, Rob [LEGIS] [LEGIS] Rob.Hogg@legis.iowa.govhide details
Ajai-

Thank you for your email regarding Senate File 276, a bill about the use of drones over Iowa. I appreciate hearing from you. I apologize for sending you a standard form response, but due to the volume of emails I have received on this issue, it is necessary.

I personally support regulation of drones that strictly limits their use and imposes meaningful safeguards on any use. Unfortunately, SF276 is a poorly drafted bill that would actually allow widespread use of drones now, and unlimited use of drones beginning July 1, 2015. You can review the bill in the “bill book” at http://www.legis.iowa.gov.

Here are several specific problems with the bill:

1. The bill, as drafted, has no penalty for the illegal use of “unmanned aircraft systems.”

2. The bill, as drafted, does not state which agency would be responsible for enforcing regulations on “unmanned aircraft systems.”

3. The term “unmanned aircraft system” is not defined. Iowa has never had any drone regulations, so the bill would leave it up to an unspecified agency or the courts to define what “unmanned aircraft system” includes.

4. The bill, as drafted, only applies to unspecified state agencies and agencies of political subdivisions with “jurisdiction over criminal law enforcement.” This would clearly not cover drone use by individuals, businesses, or state agencies like the department of natural resources, the department of transportation, the department of human services, or the department of public defense. By implication, those uses would be allowed.

5. The bill, as drafted, expressly allows the use of “unmanned aircraft systems” for disaster situations, amber alerts, and search-and-rescue operations, and by implication would allow the use of those systems for training for those purposes. The bill, as drafted, would allow agencies to determine for themselves when these situations exist as well as how much training for those situations could be done. Again, if the agency violated the law, there would be no enforcement or penalty.

6. The bill, as drafted, only regulates “unmanned aircraft systems” through July 1, 2015. It is my understanding that drone use for commercial purposes is expected to increase significantly after that date due to changes in federal regulations. It is unclear why the sponsors of SF276 chose to limit the proposed regulation only through July 1, 2015.

I believe passing this bill now would do more harm than good for those who want to limit and regulate drone use in Iowa. I wish advocates had contacted me earlier in the session when there would have been time to draft a proper senate judiciary study bill, but no one contacted me before late last week, and the deadline for bill requests has now passed.

For advocates who want to limit drone use now, the best course is to make sure Governor Branstad does not allow his state agencies – DPS, DNR, DOT, DHS, etc. – to use or encourage drones. For example, his economic development agency encouraged the manufacturing of drones in Iowa with an award of $175,000 in incentives to a drone manufacturer to locate in the state. If you would like to share your concerns about drones with Governor Branstad, you can call his office at 515-281-5211 during work hours.

Finally, to help you get involved in the legislative process so we can actually pass good legislation next year, I want to invite you to attend a public meeting on drones Wednesday morning, March 6, from 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., in Room 22 behind the Senate chamber at the Capitol to discuss the issue.

I hope to see you there.

Rob

State Senator Rob Hogg

State Capitol

Des Moines, IA 50319

(515) 281-3371 (switchboard)

http://www.robhogg.org


Lisa Kuzela files conflict of interest charges against Mayor Ron Corbett


PRESS RELEASE:

lisa1Lisa Kuzela files conflict of interest charges against Mayor Ron Corbett

On Monday, February 25, 2013, Lisa Kuzela submitted to the Iowa State Ethics Board claims of conflicts of interest that Mayor Ron Corbett has violated Iowa Code 68B.2A which prohibits outside employment and activities. Those charges have been forwarded to the Linn County Attorney’s office.

The pertinent subsections to the code are as follows:

According to:
Iowa Code 68B.2A – “Prohibited Outside Employment and Activities-Conflicts of interest:”
“Any person who serves or is employed by the state or a political subdivision of the state shall not engage in any of the following conduct:”
“Outside employment or an activity that involves the use of the state’s or the political subdivision’s time, time, facilities, equipment, and supplies …”

In addition, specifically regarding employment conflict…
“Outside employment or an activity that is subject to the official control, inspection, review, audit, or enforcement authority of the person, during the performance of the person’s duties of office or employment.”

Corbett was the Vice President of Human Resources at CRST. John Smith was President and CEO of CRST International, Inc. and is currently Chair. David Rusch is the current President and CEO of CRST. Corbett supposedly remains employed by CRST, although questions remain as to if he actually works there or simply receives a salary under a fictitious position.

Corbett has a personal interest through his official capacity of mayor which has benefitted John Smith and David Rusch at CRST which violates State Law.

The most recent actions he has taken in regards to the casino have prompted me to finally file an official complaint and request for an investigation.

My suspicion rose first when I learned who the investors were. They included John Smith and David Rusch of CRST.

Two weeks ago I learned about the Agreement between the Cedar Rapids Development Group (“investor” group) and the Linn County Gaming Association (nonprofit group) which states that if there is any debt incurred on the land or operations, then a “third party” will cover that debt. I knew what that meant. Again, the city taxpayers will be subsidizing another facility. But this time, it will be for Corbett’s employers.

Last week, I learned of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (see attached) that Corbett approved at the October 9, 2012 City Council meeting.

This Memorandum is basically a no-competition declaration stating that the City will exclusively support the Cedar Rapids Development Group, LLC and the Linn County Gaming Association, Inc. They will not consider anyone else who wants to bid for the gaming license.

This created an environment in which there can’t be competition. A bid process would have been in the form of bidding a higher percentage of funds to go to the nonprofit who then allocates it to the community.

By doing so, Corbett not only dishonored the residents, costing them tens of millions, but he secured that those proceeds will stay in the hands of the investor group, of which Smith and Rusch are investors.

The MOU that Corbett supported therefore:
1) secured that this investor group, of which Smith and Rusch are members, Cedar Rapids Development Group, LLC, and no one else, would be sole ownership of the casino, entertainment, gift shops, etc. proceeds – as stated in the Agreement;
2) secured that a lower percentage of proceeds be distributed into the community;
3) secured that this investor group will make millions more (that otherwise would’ve gone into the community).

Note that I don’t think that a bid process is required under law or regulations in this situation, however, through Corbett’s official actions, he has granted favor to Smith and Rusch of who Corbett is employed.

This MOU agenda issue was a critical one for Cedar Rapids, yet was not only not discussed at the council meeting; it was noticeably inconspicuously placed on the consent agenda. No council member pulled it off to discuss, and it was passed by the simple vote of passing the consent agenda.

The Resolution was signed by Mayor Corbett October 9, 2012. (See attached)

Earnestly submitted by
Lisa Kuzela

Extended information: The casino conflict of interest has many tentacles …

In April 2012, I, along with others, attended and spoke at a House Ways and Means Subcommittee regarding Senate File 2217 – a $600 million bill for “flood protection” in which Mayor Corbett strongly lobbied for. At that meeting, there were two lobbyists from CRST. At the time none of us could understand why they were there.

This bill, signed into law April 19, 2012, was so broadly worded that it allows any project to be funded under this bill, as long as part of the major project qualifies as “flood protection.” This includes a casino.

Senate File 2217, Section 4 – New Section 418.1 Definition #5 “Project”
“A project may consist of one or more phases of construction or reconstruction that are contracted for separately if the larger project, of which the project is a part, otherwise meets the requirements of this subsection.”

Although the bill states the funds would be granted to the “governmental entity,” this city knows how to get around that. Three LLCs (Courthouse II LLC, Courthouse II Tenant LLC, and Courthouse II Manager LLC) were created for the former Federal Courthouse / new City Hall, in which they used all public funds to rehabilitate. By doing this, not only did the taxpayers end up paying more, but it bypassed any bidding process that was required by law with these funds and prevented transparency.

There’s already an LLC formed for the casino – Cedar Rapids Development Group, LLC. I predict they will do the same with the casino – providing even more funding to the “investor” group – all with our tax money!

Now that the casino project is being pushed and John Smith and David Rusch have been named as investors, I think I understand now why a trucking company located miles from the river was lobbying for a “flood protection” bill.

Currently, as I predicted, Corbett and Senator Rob Hogg are lobbying the Board (established under this bill) to have part of the casino project count as flood protection.

However, if this is granted by the Board then, according to the bill, the taxpayers, rather than the investors, can be paying for the construction of the casino project with the appearance that the investor group (LLC) is paying for it.

Sidebar: Each phase or subproject is capped at receiving $15 million through this law. In addition it requires a “local match.” However, the State received a waiver from HUD allowing the CDBG Disaster Assistance to count as a local match. Therefore, with this match, it allows Corbett to help fund up to $30 million per phase / subproject of the major casino project. Thereby, leaving the investor group, of which John Smith and David Rusch of CRST are investors, to invest very little, if any, toward the casino, obligating Local, State and Federal taxpayers to fund the construction of the casino.

Recently, it’s been published that Ron Corbett has historically opposed a local casino. I even heard him say so at a dinner during his campaign at the Islamic Center in Cedar Rapids. He said that the market is saturated and it doesn’t make sense to have another one here.

Now he suddenly supports a casino.

Of course this sudden change of attitude about such a major issue is usually explained away politically, but when all these facts are pieced together, questions can’t help but be raised as to why he is now using his elected position as mayor to push through the casino upon which Smith and Rusch are an investors.

Earnestly submitted by Lisa Kuzela, Cedar Rapids, Iowa

###

memorandum of understw

Related articles


Say No to Drones


English: Official portrait of Iowa State Senat...

English: Official portrait of Iowa State Senator Robert M. Hogg (IA-19) for the 84th General Assembly. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Senator Rob Hogg doesn’t have the time to consider SF 276 – He would rather surrender himself to the mercy of the drones…

It’s only a one page bill, but apparently having Senator Hogg sit down to read it and mull it over is too much to ask.

Please contact Senator Hogg, ask him to give SF276 the consideration it deserves and schedule a hearing ASAP.

Senator Robert Hogg (D- Cedar Rapids)
rob.hogg@legis.iowa.gov
319.247.0223

You see, Hogg is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Without Senator Hogg scheduling a committee hearing on SF 276, our common sense drone regulations are dead in the water.

With political leaders like Sen. Hogg being too lazy to consider a one page bill, it’s no wonder our country is in such bad shape.

That type of “leadership” is completely unacceptable.

Please contact Senator Hogg, ask him to give SF276 the consideration it deserves and schedule a hearing ASAP.

Senator Robert Hogg (D- Cedar Rapids)
rob.hogg@legis.iowa.gov
319.247.0223

Living in a police state enforced by flying robots is not an option.

So here at Liberty Iowa, we are going to do everything in our power to persuade Senator Hogg on the dangers that drones pose to our liberty, privacy, and peace of mind.

Tackling the special interests and established politicians is not easy.

In fact, it is very expensive in time and money.

If you share my disdain for the robotic police state being erected around us, please donate generously to our cause.

Every dollar donated is carefully spent advancing the cause — by fighting back at the aloof tyrants who are too busy to read a one page bill and fulfill their duties as a legislator.

Even $25 – a half tank of gas- goes a long way in unleashing the political power of our all-volunteer army.

Thank you for your attention to these very important matters, and for your dedication and commitment to the cause of Liberty.

Faithfully Yours In Liberty,

Jeff Shipley
Chairman
Liberty Iowa Legislative Committee

P.S. Failure to consider a one-page bill is unacceptable! Please contact Senator Hogg, ask him to give SF276 the consideration it deserves and schedule a hearing ASAP.

Senator Robert Hogg (D- Cedar Rapids)
rob.hogg@legis.iowa.gov
319.247.0223

Related articles

 


What if?


What if the casino measure doesn’t pass?  Will McLeod and Gray still invest on the west bank?

The suits in the articles listed in the video aboveclaim McLeodUSA and several senior executives made false and misleading statements to inflate the value of McLeodUSA stock [b]They accuse McLeodUSA of failing to disclose it lacked funds to complete its national telecommunications network and failing to take impairment losses on money-losing acquisitions in a timely fashion.[/b]
The Gazette January 22 2002

Mr. Gray served as President of McLeodUSA Incorporated from April 1992 until December 2004

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Gray_Stephen_1581321.aspx


Come On In and Gamble


Come On In and Gamble

The_Gray_Gang_crop

Local governments have taken the bait

A 20 year monopoly on casino gambling in Linn County

A 3% minimum required by law return to the community

City owned real estate for their casino at an undetermined amount

Steve Gray and the Casino Gang say it is all about jobs, fun and entertainment

“A Cedar Rapids attorney was disbarred this week for taking $800,000 from client accounts that was used for her “gambling addiction,” according to disbarment documents filed Wednesday with the Iowa Supreme Court.”

http://thegazette.com/2013/02/22/cedar-rapids-attorney-disbarred-admits-to-taking-800000-out-of-client-acounts-for-gambling/

If tragedy is the entertainment you crave, you will get it with

Linn County Gambling


Police Grasping Straws in California – Have they gone too Far?


lacop-articleInlineThe police is out in full force in southern California. Law enforcement is on a massive manhunt for one of their own. It should be clear to the public by now that they are not safe.  Police have shot up a truck thinking it belonged to Christopher Dorner injuring two women. http://fox4kc.com/2013/02/08/la-police-shoot-at-wrong-suspect-vehicle-injure-two-women/  Two cops were shot in Riverside, California and police there have reason to believe it was Dorner.

It almost seems inconceivable that this one rouge police officer would be able to use up so many resources. How far will a corrupt police department go to protect their own hides?
In all reality Christopher Dorner doesn’t have to clear his name. I think that people are finding out first hand the wrath of the LAPD and other police who feel threatened by the rouge police officer.

“The Los Angeles Police Department will reopen its investigation into the 2007 episode that led to the firing of Christopher J. Dorner, the former police officer who is wanted in three killings, department officials said Saturday night.” The department may have reopened the case but now his name will be tarnished and he will be known as a murderer. Click here for the whole story: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/us/los-angeles-police-to-reopen-dorner-case.html?smid=fb-share  Though the case will be re-opened is it too little too late?
How does this pertain to other communities in the United States?  We have a rare opportunity to use this situation to our advantage to stop anything else like this from happening.  We could start with opening and re-opening cases that should be investigated.  How about listening to people before they feel forced to go to these kinds of extremes to “clear their name”? To protect the mentally ill from police brutality.

Dorner tried doing things the right way.  He even took his case to court in attempt to clear his name and lost. I don’t condone what Mr. Dorner is doing but I understand why he’s doing it.  Sadly. In the manifesto he said that this could stop if they did what he asked them to do.  Finding this guy will be like looking for a needle in a haystack.  If he isn’t somewhere dead it sounds like there are plenty of people who would hide him.  The cops are making themselves look bad I mean shooting up two ladies, harassing a lady in the desert by helicopter, searching every single car, going house to house.  The resources they’re using are insane.  I hope that this “re-opening” of this case stops the madness. Below is the case to be re-opened.  Let’s hope that these deaths aren’t in vain and real changes will occur across the nation.

DORNER v. LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT