LOL, those are hilarious!

On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 11:13:02 AM UTC-4, Bear Guy wrote:
>
> On a lighter note. Dana Loesch asked her followers on Twitter to name the 
> "cop-killer killer robot".
>
> The responses are pretty entertaining. 
>
> https://twitter.com/dloesch/status/751960622766567424
>
> C4PO is my fav.
>
> Thatbearguy
> @Thatbearguy
>
>
>
> On 11 July 2016 at 10:43, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum <
> [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>>
>> I heard yesterday that the robot had a pound of C4 on it. No wonder they 
>> didn't show the footage of blowing that POS up!
>>
>> On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 1:07:00 PM UTC-4, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree Perp.....I see no distinction between using this mechanized 
>>> robot which apparently had some type of cannon on it; versus using the 
>>> Dallas Swat team.  The author is attempting to portray this as some type of 
>>> violation of our Constitutional rights, and I just don't see it that way.  
>>>
>>> I genuinely believe, based on the news coverage of the whole incident 
>>> that evening, that they were in contact with Johnson,  (it was quite 
>>> obvious that the Dallas Police Chief had "first hand" knowledge of what 
>>> Johnson was conveying to Dallas Police long before the robot was engaged) 
>>> and yes, there was some attempt to get Johnson to surrender.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 12:40 PM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I fail to see the difference in terms of morality between sending in 20 
>>>> cops with machine guns (and risking some or all of them being blown up by 
>>>> a 
>>>> terrorist - which this guy WAS) vs. sending in a remote-controlled weapon 
>>>> to take him out. The decision-making would be the same - determining he 
>>>> was 
>>>> guilty without trial and needed to be killed. The only thing using a robot 
>>>> to do it with achieved was to preserve the lives of LEOs. How is that a 
>>>> dangerous thing? I applaud it, and only wish we had had similar capability 
>>>> to take out the terrorist in Orlando without harming innocents before he 
>>>> killed 49 of them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 12:09:31 PM UTC-4, MJ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> July 9th, 2016
>>>>>
>>>>> *A Drone Was Used to Blow up a US Citizen Without Trial Yesterday. Let 
>>>>> That Sink In *by hqanon
>>>>>
>>>>> * ( RPI 
>>>>> <http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2016/july/08/in-dallas-drone-wars-just-came-home/>)
>>>>>  
>>>>> *The Dallas shootings have ushered in a very new world for U.S. 
>>>>> citizens. For the very first time, a drone has been used on U.S. soil to 
>>>>> kill an American without trial or charges.
>>>>>
>>>>> The suspected shooter in yesterday’s tragic killings, U.S. Army 
>>>>> veteran Micah Xavier Johnson, was, according to police and press reports, 
>>>>> holed up in a parking garage and would not give himself up. After hours 
>>>>> of 
>>>>> what police claimed were fruitless negotiations with Johnson, a 
>>>>> weaponized 
>>>>> robot was sent 
>>>>> <http://undergroundreporter.org/killer-robot-dallas-human-rights/> to 
>>>>> where he was hiding and blown up, taking Johnson with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Get past the horror of what Johnson was accused of doing and think 
>>>>> about that precedent for a moment. Is it not chilling?
>>>>>
>>>>> RPI regular contributor Peter Van Buren, a retired State Department 
>>>>> official who did a tour in Iraq, put a very fine point on the “robot” 
>>>>> bomb:
>>>>>
>>>>> [image: Emacs!] 
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, even without wings, this was a drone sent in to kill an 
>>>>> American suspected of a crime.
>>>>>
>>>>> Police claim that continuing the negotiations was pointless and 
>>>>> attempting to capture him would have put officers at risk. He was 
>>>>> supposedly shooting. While no sane person wants police officers to be 
>>>>> killed, risk is something we are told they willingly accept when they 
>>>>> sign 
>>>>> up for police duty. There are plenty of low-risk jobs out there.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> African-American Dallas protester Mark Hughes was wrongly identified 
>>>>> <http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/07/08/3796589/dallas-misidentified-suspect/>
>>>>>  
>>>>> by Dallas Police as a suspect in the shootings. Police tweeted photos of 
>>>>> Hughes marching with protesters openly carrying a rifle, as is permitted 
>>>>> in 
>>>>> Texas. Police claimed he was involved in the shooting. He was a suspect 
>>>>> just like Johnson was a suspect. During questioning they told Hughes 
>>>>> that they had video of him shooting people 
>>>>> <http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/man-wrongly-idd-as-dallas-shooting-person-of-interest-says-cops-lied-to-him-during-interrogation/>,
>>>>>  
>>>>> which was a lie. What if police had sent in a drone to take out Mark 
>>>>> Hughes? What will happen in the future to a future Mark Hughes, falsely 
>>>>> accused by police of being involved in a shooting? Will we come to accept 
>>>>> murder without trial?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://anonhq.com/drone-used-blow-us-citizen-without-trial-yesterday-let-sink-inrpi-dallas-shootings-ushered-new-world-u-s-citizens-first-time-drone/
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>  
>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>
>>>> --- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>  
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to