@C_O and no one else. Posting is covered by Privacy Act.
I’ve been very polite and factual in this thread since my release. My one joke was clearly just word play. please do not exile (sp?) me again. PLEEEAAASSSSEEEE!!!
BTW: I have been released on bail conditional on electronic monitoring and good behavior.
Your bail has been revoked due to you violating your 20 minute journey vow-you can’t refrain from commenting on topics that were started by this person and/or replying directly to him. What exactly does “any and all’ mean to you?
ASSUME THE POSITION.
Remember this? THe story vanished after the air marshall denied they heard the wife saying he was mentally ill and hadn’t taken his meds… They waited for him to run off the plane, where he no longer posed any risk, and then wasted him for being mentally ill. The story was then buried.
@nom de guerre: Respectfully submit I have adhered to the guidelines.
1. The moderators closed “my 20 day journey” thread. This represented an official forum moderator disapproval of my journey and withdrawal of requirements.
2. Yesterday I was voluntarily entered the “ARLnow Isolation Cell” for a period of 24 hours.
3. Within that 24 period, I made my “one allowed” posting as allowed to anyone in jail. Consider it an “internet phone call.” This was to provide crucial information (a video) related to others comments.
4. My subsequent posts were after the 24 hour period, and after I was released from my jail cell. Hats off to those that provided bail money!
5. And while I have responded within threads started by PERSON Number One (as referred to in sealed legal documentation) I have not responded directly to PERSON Number One. And have been very respective of and to all parties in my response. I did repeat a line from PERSON Number One to make a crotch joke. However, this was not in response to the gist of the post or directed at PERSON Number One
6. Furthermore, heck everyone posts all sorts of cr^p. Any further singling out of my behavior – as long as it remains polite, respective, information, or pleasantly engaging will be considered harassment. Or at minimum worth a beer or two. :-)
@nom de guerre: Gosh, I missed the workshop, and I don’t think I could afford it without a student loan.
But, ….seriously….while I enjoy your reminders to us all, please minimize comments directed to me. Yes, I brought this on myself. But, you haven’t seen me flail away at the keyboard or taunt said person. I assume you’re joking, but honestly, maybe over the internet something is being lost.
The media is hiding it but she was shot trying to flee exiting the car she was killed outside of the car according to one account , if that’s the case the police were completely unjustified
If the media is hiding it, how do you know?
If I were a cop, and some driver tried to storm through a barricade at the white house, then led police on a chase to the Capitol building, THEN tried to flee the car, why wouldn’t one of my first thoughts be a possible bomb on the driver or in the car?
@C_O: The liberal media is in cahoots with the conservative Secret Service Agency to cover-up what really happened. All civilian eyewitnesses have been rounded up and are being kept in the tunnels under RFK stadium. As this psychotic woman was simply exiting her car, and asking for directions, she did not pose a threat. After all, remember , Sara Jane Moore who supposedly fired a shot at President Ford? Heck, she was just standing in a crowd, and the next thing you know the Secret Service charge her with a federal crime. According to one account she was taken off the streets because she was about to disclose super top secret nuclear plans to the liberal media. See, all clear now? The woman in this DC episode is Sara Jane Moore’s love child. The question is “whose the daddy?”
If I were a cop, and some driver tried to storm through a barricade at the white house, then led police on a chase to the Capitol building, THEN tried to flee the car, why wouldn't one of my first thoughts be a possible bomb on the driver or in the car?
Speaking of the Obvious, If I were a cop, and some driver tried to storm through a barricade at the White House, then led police on a chase to the Capitol building, THEN tried to flee the car, why wouldn't one of my first thoughts be that the driver of the car suffered from a mental illness?
The security personnel first and foremost responsibility is to neutralize the perceived threat. Not to ascribe a motive or evaluate one’s psychological status. But let’s assume that security police knew the driver was delusional and irrational. That only makes the perpetrator more dangerous.
At the point they shot and killed her they knew she was unarmed and a baby was in the car
I know you guys can’t admit that you are wrong, but it’s every second looking more and more like she was murdred. THey not only knew she wasn’t armed, knew there was a baby, they killed her after she got out of the car and was trying to run away, to save her life.
Can I ask you why you are defending the police here? Because its part of your narrative that they were forced to work without pay?
novasteve October 6, 2013 – 7:03 am #89913 Reply
At the point they shot and killed her they knew she was unarmed and a baby was in the car.
I don’t know that. I’m curious as to your source and why u are so certain of your conclusions? I’m waiting until the official after report to make my conclusion. Anything g before is speculative.
You lost me when u tied the shooting incident with the goveument budget issue. The “work without pay” issue has nothing to do with shooting analysis.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.