Blog Archives

Dorners ‘Manifesto’: Manufacturing a D.B. Cooper-ish Urban Legend?


What would it mean if the Dorner ‘Manifesto’ was not written by him? What if he were deliberately being made into an urban legend to cover up crimes by the real authors, including Dorner’s murder before the Cabin assault even took place?

By H. Michael Sweeney, copyright © 2013, all rights reserved, proparanoid.wordpress.com
Permission to duplicate online hereby granted provided it is reproduced in full with all links and text colors in tact and unaltered, including this notice.

What you will learn reading this post:

• There are many clues which make it doubtful that Dorner is the sole author, such as…
• there are three distinctly different writing styles, typically standing out as if additions after the fact inconsistent with and reversing the intent of material clearly Dorner’s;
• there are past tense and third-person references to Dorner as if already dead, and implied future tense when relating to the murders Dorner allegedly committed;
• there are clever tricks designed to paint Dorner ‘mad’ which not even a crazy person would be fool enough to write.

Was Dorner framed? Who wrote Dorner’s manifesto? Was dormer killed and his body put in the cabin?

wallet found

They claim they found Dorner’s wallet and readable ID here? Sure. But that’s OK, because they also found it at the Mexican border. Sure. At least that’s what they told media to tell us when it was expedient. Image: redicecreations.com (click) – about two wallets.

I must say that when I first heard reports about the Dorner incident, each update simply seemed more and more… unbelievable. Increasingly, the possibility grew in my mind that it was a set up. I mean, you have a good, moral cop fighting a just cause against corrupt, brutal, and racist cops harming citizens, and then he’s suddenly a crazed killer destroying the very foundation of his case by brutally murdering a minority citizen… not to mention cops? And everyone signs off. Please.

That’s just as believable as conveniently finding known terrorist’s wallets with their real identities, not alias’ commonly used as a cover, among the ashes in attacks where the largest thing otherwise remaining was a mote of ash. They’ve pulled that one on us three times that I know of, including Sept. 11 attacks. No false flag here… move along, move along.

But wait! They’ve found Dormer’s wallet repleat with readable plastic ID, where? The ashes of the burned-to-the-foundation cabin? AND, they found them at the Mexican border just hours earlier? No conspiracy here… move along, move along.

The only way I could justify the actions claimed of Dorner in my mind was if it were yet another ‘mass shooting’ event sparked by psychotropic SSRI drugs of the likes of Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, and others. These killer-makers all have murder and other violence as unpredictable side effects, and have been found to be in use by virtually all mass shooters. Ban guns? No thank you, but please, ban SSRIs and zany brain Witch Doctors who keep inventing new reasons to prescribe them like candy. Check out the facts and how SSRIs have bearing on the matter.

Sure. If Dorner was suffering depression, stress, and daily anxiety that he might be shot dead by dirty cops for ‘crossing the Blue Line,’ he might have been prescribed SSRIs for cause. But I doubt it. Because consistently co-present with the violent side effects is a lack of reason, logic, motive, or even an understanding of why they undertook violent acts, or even clear recall of them. Dorner, in his ‘manifesto,’ not only remembers, but screams a reason, motive, and understanding — flawed thinking though it be. But then, there are problems with the validity of that document…  I don’t think he is the sole author.

Was Dorner framed? Who wrote Dorner’s manifesto? Was dormer killed and his body put in the cabin?

A manifesto which is not a Manifesto

Trotted out was the alleged Manifesto, which is in this case is really nothing more than a dumb-you-down term used much the same way the Davidian ranch at Waco and Randy Weaver’s log cabin were variously called an ‘enclave,’ a ‘fortress,’ or a ‘compound,’ all implying military defensive planning in their design. Propaganda BS. Reading Dorner’s work (uncensored version), you find there is no Manifesto present, at all.

No. Instead, it seems like five distinctly different texts in three differing styles as if by three different persons, and for four different purposes, not counting some political sandbagging and blindsiding thrown in for good measure. If you take away the things which seem added, all you have remaining is a plea for LAPD to do the right thing about a laundry list of wrongdoing.

1)   The main body, which accounts for the bulk of the 18 page document is a detailed review of crimes and abuse of power of LAPD Officers, leadership, and events relating to Dorner’s whistleblowing and the resulting harassment and cover up — an event log. There is reason, calm, logic, and moral dignity present, and cohesive writing style. Clearly, it is the Dorner who fits the profile of a good cop and who is in control of himself. No Manifesto, it is merely a point-by-point, blow-by-blow accounting of his experiences trying to be that good Cop.

2)   The introduction paragraph, on the other hand, is something else: a ‘confession’ of the murders and what sounds like an attempt to ‘excuse’ them by virtue of righteous indignation forcing acts of extreme violence as a “Last Resort,” which is indeed the title line. But were these things added later by someone else?

Particularly problematic is the writing style of this large paragraph. It is like the 9-11 cell phone calls from hijacked planes where callers spoke in ways no one ever does, revealing the calls were staged: “Hi, this is Mark Phillips, your son.”  Would not a Mom know her own son, and their family’s last name? Interesting, especially since cell phones in those days did not work at altitude.

In the ‘manifesto,’ we read what seems like someone else trying to make you think them Dorner. Why would you write about yourself the way others describe you when you are not around, and generally only at your funeral service or on a death bed — in past tense?

Example a): “…completely out of character for the man you KNEW who always wore a smile wherever he WAS seen.”

Even if one actually believed that’s how people saw them, would they not more likely in such a case say; “… out of character for someone who always tries to wear a smile…” or “known for always wearing a smile…”?

Example b):I know most of you who personally know me are in disbelief to hear from media reports that I am SUSPECTED of committing such horrendous murders…”

Why not simply say “…disbelief that I murdered anyone…”? And why even bring up media at all, especially via the expression, ‘media reports’? If I were going to say it at all, I’d simply say ‘on the news,’ but it is entirely superfluous given its assumed they had to know by one means or another… unless one is writing in knowledge that there WILL BE breaking news, and that writer is used to describing news as ‘media reports.’ That is exactly the way Cops and others who must at times cite news sources, including myself, would be used to saying it. Its use implies a different writer, one with foreknowledge of future events. Sure, Dorner is also a Cop, so he might write it that way, too, except that…

In like manner, the choice of the word ‘suspected.’ If you know you did it and are taking credit there on the spot, why use that word at all.

If written instead by another Cop framing Dorner, that Cop would be so used to referring to third-parties as suspects, and expressing ‘facts’ in certain ways, that it could have easily crept into typed text without notice. Someone writing about their own actions is not so moved. These are not the only instances, and more to the point, they only exist in select parts of the text, nowhere in what appears to be the main body (next three items) clearly written by Dorner.

3)   In the middle of the main body, the accusations against LAPD, we find a curious out-of-place section, a very large paragraph, of zero relevance asking journalists to review his school years (he lists towns he lived in) to show he was never a bully or got into fights.  And yet, the same paragraph describes an incident with him throwing the first and only punch and getting punished, and about continually earning more such punishments thereafter. Excuse me? It is as if someone wanted journalists to deduce the opposite of what the paragraph claims to want, and deem him not only violent minded, but mentally incompetent and unable to distinguish between the two states of being. It had to have been ADDED to get there in the middle, given a lack of context to prior or following material.

4)   The passage is one of only two sections, which use profanity. It is also the one place where he derides Christianity and claims not to be a Christian, though elsewhere he presents his morals in very Christian terms. Now, I’ve read many documents similar in nature where the author was non Christian, and they made negative comments at every opportunity, not at just one point.. So I must ask:

Could this section have been inserted, and ‘addressed’ to journalists because, a few paragraphs later, Dorner also asks in the main body that journalists review a particular set of events and specific records which validate his LAPD accusations? By sounding completely bonkers and self contradictory in the first request, the second request would likely be ignored as well. This is essentially the whole de facto effect (and purpose?) of the entire ‘manifesto.’ It screams ‘ignore anything I say or complain about, because I do the opposite of what I say and am worse than those I complain about.’

Funny thing is… the nature of sociopathic and psychopathic behavior specifically includes the ability to well hide it, rather than to reveal it unknowingly — which requires them to be immune from doxastic self deception (i.e., saying you do not get into fights, then citing fights, and not sensing the paradox). Someone deliberately created that paradoxical paragraph.

5)   From that point forward, it seems as if almost every paragraph of the remaining main body text has at least one sentence, or even a whole paragraph (added?) which tends to convert it from a rational, non threatening letter into a reprehensible, irrational threat. You literally feel the tone change between what came before, and the additions. I get the distinct impression someone started by adding the final section (described next) at the bottom of the document, and then worked their way up paragraph by paragraph, editing for an I-am-a-mad-man-so-kill-me-quick effect, and stopped with the middle insert we just reviewed. Save original passages, most are tacked onto the end, because that’s the easiest thing to do, and they are often very simple, short one liners — but an original writer would tend to include such key elements throughout the dialog and thoughtfully so.

Example a) I have exhausted all available means at obtaining my name back. I have attempted all legal court efforts within appeals at the Superior Courts and California Appellate courts. This is my last resort. The LAPD has suppressed the truth and it has now lead to deadly consequences. The LAPD’s actions have cost me my law enforcement career that began on 2/7/05 and ended on 1/2/09. They cost me my Naval career which started on 4/02 and ends on 2/13. I had a TS/SCI clearance(Top Secret Sensitive Compartmentalized Information clearance) up until shortly after my termination with LAPD. This is the highest clearance a service member can attain other than a Yankee White TS/SCI which is only granted for those working with and around the President/Vice President of the United States. I lost my position as a Commanding Officer of a Naval Security Forces reserve unit at NAS Fallon because of the LAPD. I’ve lost a relationship with my mother and sister because of the LAPD. I’ve lost a relationship with close friends because of the LAPD. In essence, I’ve lost everything because the LAPD took my name and new I was INNOCENT!!! Capt Phil Tingirides, Justin Eisenberg, Martella, Randy Quan, and Sgt. Anderson all new I was innocent but decided to terminate me so they could continue Ofcr. Teresa Evans career. I know about the meeting between all of you where Evans attorney, Rico, confessed that she kicked Christopher Gettler (excessive force). Your day has come.

Example b) Chief Beck, this is when you need to have that come to Jesus talk with Sgt. Teresa Evans and everyone else who was involved in the conspiracy to have me terminated for doing the right thing. you also need to speak with her attorney, Rico, and his conversation with the BOR members and her confession of guilt in kicking Mr. Gettler. I’ll be waiting for a PUBLIC response at a press conference. When the truth comes out, the killing stops.

Example c): Those Hispanic officers who victimize their own ethnicity because they are new immigrants to this country and are unaware of their civil rights. You call them wetbacks to their face and demean them in front of fellow officers of different ethnicities so that you will receive some sort of acceptance from your colleagues. I’m not impressed. Most likely, your parents or grandparents were immigrants at one time, but you have forgotten that. You are a high value target.

6)   The next, closing section is a long list of ranting which, along with a concentration of profanity, is a bit of a grab bag. It is unusual in that it has countless little paragraphs aimed at a wide variety of public figures in a bouncy mixture of complaints and praise which render the writer a loon. Also in the section is a kind of long train wreck of a letter to LAPD, with dire warnings of impending violence towards other cops and their families. Much of the letter portion, if one again discounted sentences and portions which might have been added to flip meaning, may indeed have been written by a sane Dorner, a genuine plea to do the right thing, with additions again subverting them into threats. That is not how threatening people write. The nastiness is pervasive, not tacked on neatly. Sans such additions, it is no longer a train wreck, nor rambling.

7)   These added things tend to be in the same style otherwise questioned in the opening examples, but with more Angst and vileness.

Example (not a typo by me) regarding killing cops; It was against everything I’ve ever was.

Wait a minute. There is a difference between me writing about me; “It was against everything I’ve ever been,” or about someone else; “It was against everything he ever was.” Those are the only two possible original sentences. Either there was a super-nova brain fart, or a partial correction was made to the later sentence. Let me explain.

Imagine someone other the Dorner subliminally mixing thought states from first to third person as well as from relating life experience of the living to past experiences before one’s death. So ingrained as natural to repetitive writing about third parties (in Police reports?), perhaps, that only a partial editing correction (‘he’ to ‘I’ve) was made, the writer still not catching the tell-tale ‘was.’ Either or both reasons for the error make it someone other than Dorner doing the writing, and further implies Dorner already dead, or sure knowledge he was to be, soon.

8)   Nothing in the document would convince you Dorner was crazy as much as does the letter component. When I say rambling, I mean a completely different visible style of sentence structure (or lack thereof), with gross errors not common to the main body. Among them, are incomplete or nonsense sentences, such as the very last one, “We need to hold ou” What? The Cops were at the door and he had to stop mid-sentence and fetch some beers? And yet, again, these sentences/passages are mixed in as if additions to existent, logical, well written material. Take them away, and it suddenly seems normal.

9)   And what about depression? He ‘admits’ suffering from it in the letter part. Funny thing about that is, it always seems officials in questionable deaths of the politically incorrect find a way to say ‘We had indications he was depressed…’ when they ‘suicide.’ Perhaps, but that still only accounts for the murders if he was on psychotropics, for which nothing else matches the symptoms, and still leaves the document flawed in its present construct.

10)  But also in the section is a very long rambling bit which seems to be there only to serve gun grabber needs, and given that Dorner is (allegedly) now one of the ‘mass shooters’ of late, we can expect it to be one more log on the fire in that debate. How convenient.

But, uh… what should we expect, given that the section also praises the likes of both Clintons and Sr. Bush, as well as CIA’s (or Mossad’s) journalists of choice (links reveal), Walter Cronkite (Who wrote this? WC retired when Dorner was three years old!), Peter + Jennings, Anderson Cooper, and Wolf Blitzer, et. al? A Globalist’s Cop who likes a controlled media — who owns all manner of firearms, which he lists, and yet wishes were banned, and which are on Feinstein’s list, too? Please. No propaganda here, move along…

Was Dorner framed? Who wrote Dorner’s manifesto? Was dormer killed and his body put in the cabin?

Conclusion

Given the dichotomy and logic and style flipping content overall, one might choose to toss off the concerns I’ve stated and to instead presume it at simple face value as the work of a lunatic. Heaven knows media is accepting it, so why shouldn’t we? We will actually answer that question, in another blog in this series.

For me, because there is no hint of a specific or consistent lunacy… because nothing in the document as it sits should make any sense even to a deluded writer… because of the clues of alternate author additions cited… we might do well to question authenticity. If NOT authentic, then there is a conspiracy, and nothing we’ve heard about any event related to the matter can be trusted to be true. So, presuming there is a motive to decieve, is there anything suggesting means and opportunity, for someone to make such changes to Dorner’s words? Lets ask a couple of key questions which address that:

1)   Where did the ‘manifesto’ come from?  Answer, from a Facebook page the LA Times describes as “believed to be Dorner’s.” Huh? Three problems with that:

a) wishy-washy ‘believed to be,’ makes me wonder all the more about authenticity. I have doubts, because…

b) anyone can get a Facebook account in any name they want not already taken, and…

c) anyone who has ever had a FB account should know how easy they are to be hijacked, hacked, or accessed and manipulated by unauthorized users via password cracking. Ergo, next question…

2)   How secure were Dorner’s computers and access to his Web accounts? Answer, from his own documentation of LAPD targeting for being a whistleblower; Thaniya Sungruenyos, an LAPD Officer had hacked his Los Angeles Police Federal Credit Union account from her home address, per the IP address provided by the Financial institution. LAPD ignored the evidence and covered up the event, according to Dorner.

Interesting what you can learn, when you question the official line and look more closely. Seen anyone in media following suit? No? Well, that leaves just you and me conspiracy theorists, I guess. But then, there are other people who wonder, too. Check out the last two related articles about Dorner, one of them a Police Chief.

What is the truth about Chris Dorner?

Next up: Dorner, the Urban Legend: Implications Behind a Fraudulent Manifesto

Is Dorner really dead?

Military Viewpoint: We are Six People Away From Revolution


High Ranking Military Says Martial Law Likely,

Armed Conflict with Citizens On The Horizon

by H. Michael Sweeney

In an earlier article we reviewed just how easy it is to start a revolution, how few people it takes, and how remarkably little it can cost in lives. That was based on such a revolution being initiated by popular revolt of the people. In this article, we examine the possibility that such a revolution could be sponsored by military action, either an outright military coup against which the people rally in protest to restore the Constitution, or in which the government is indeed taken over and becomes a military police state without useful resistance.  I sure hope neither path could be true, but there is a lot to make one wonder…

Image from New Internationalist Magazine (click)

In my book, Fatal Rebirth (proparanoidpress.com), I quote U.S. Army General Tommy Franks on this topic. You remember him?  He’s the guy that commanded the flame throwing tank at WACO that first injected lethal gas into their underground bunkers where the children and women were, and then burned most of the rest of the Davidians alive.

You know BATF were pretty badly threatened by those darned Bible thumpers, because all the videos showed gunfire in only one direction… in. Not one bullet hitting a vehicle or the ground from which the ‘good guys’ that later bulldozed the place and concealed all possible evidence were shooting from. Here’s my footnote from Fatal Rebirth on what Franks had to say on topic.

4 Newsmax, Nov. 21, 3003: US Army General Tommy Franks, who led the coalition invasion of Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein, is reported to have described in an interview to be printed in the Dec. issue of Cigar Aficionado, that the results of another attack by terrorists with weapons of mass destruction would result in our Constitutional form of government being replaced by a Military government. Don’t cry for us, Argentina! 

An aside about the tank at WACO. That tank came from the local national guard which had a number of units ready to go, and one unit that was in the shop. Why, do you suppose, did Franks, instead of having them get one of the tanks ready to go, to instead send a truck for the tank in the shop… which he then had trucked to a CIA/DOD contractor for ‘special work,’ and then sent directly to the Davidian farm? I hope you have nothing in your hand to throw at the computer screen when you read the answer…

You Have a Dog…                                          I Have a Flame Throwing Tank                    poster from motifake.com (click)

Because the tank in the shop was the only one on the base that was a flame throwing variant. This was all reported by activist/lawyer Linda Thompson, who even acquired the serial number to prove it. She also reported that the few survivors were not taken into BATF custody, but to the same CIA proprietary where the tank was modified for ‘rigorous debriefing.’ That’s how you get the really good confessions!

Franks is not our only source. The above cited footnote was in a section talking about the military’s use of the “Shoot Americans questionnaire‘ given to various military units which I reproduced in my book, The Professional Paranoid Defensive Field Guide. Of course, the military called it a ‘Combat Arms Survey,’ and claimed it was not official, used only once with a room full of guys from one unit, and intended only to help some Lieutenant write a thesis. Too bad GIs began popping up out of the woodwork at dozens of other units and multiple branches of the military to counter those claims, or we might actually believe the DOD tells the truth once in a while. Operation Northwoods had nothing to do with Sept. 11, right guys? Right.

This ‘one time’ thingie was a ‘rating’ questionnaire, which means that answer choices were ‘Strongly Agree,’ ‘Agree,’ ‘Disagree,’ ‘Disagree Strongly,’ and ‘No Opinion.’ Check out some of the questions, some paraphrased or concatenated for space conservation. The first batch relate to use of military for illegal use against citizens in violation of Posse Comitatus:

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used within the United States for (several things to be answered individually followed): Drug enforcement; Security at national events (e.g. Olympic Games, Super Bowl); Substitute teachers in public schools; Federal and State prison guards; National emergency police force; Advisors to SWAT units, FBI, BATF, etc.

A number of questions related to United Nations loyalty

U.N. Combat troops should be allowed to serve in U.S. military training exercises under U.S. command or vice versa? The President of the U.S. has the authority to pass his responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to the U.N. Secretary General? I feel there is no conflict between my Oath to serve and serving as a U.N. soldier? U.S. units should be permanently assigned to the United Nations? I would swear to this oath: “I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain World peace and every nation’s way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.”

This image is decades old: WWII trucks with UN markings on U.S. highway

An aside about United Nations involvement. For more than twenty years there has been an unending stream of concern that U.N. Troops might be called in to suppress U.S. Civilians in a civil unrest situation. We can thank, I suppose, Henry Kissinger for the fear, because it was he who said, “Today America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all people of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by the World Government.”

He is frequently quoted as saying that at the 1991 Bilderberger meeting. If you don’t know who they are, stop reading and close your eyes some more. It will all be over before you know it. In part perhaps, because over the twenty years there have also been a steady stream of reports and photographs of fleets of U.N. vehicles on truck convoys, long trains of flatbed rail cars, and stored in massive lots behind guarded fences protected by Men in Black. The Spotlight newspaper in Washington, D.C., now defunct, was awash with them. The thing about these U.N. vehicles is that they were almost always WWII U.S. issue or Soviet surplus, neither of which are used by United Nations troops. So if and when you seen them deployed, know that whomever is driving them is NOT a U.N. Soldier. Hmmm… Such disguises in times of war (revolution is war) calls for a firing squad.

In all, there were 46 questions. The last was the big one:

The U.S. government declares a ban on possession, sale, transportation of firearms. After 30 days to turn in weapons to authorities, a number of citizen groups refuse.  I would fire on U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms? 

The final tally?

The answers to the test (the original bunch of guys — 264 in all) were scary: 1 in four Marines would shoot you. Four out of five will Police you at Super Bowl or hassle you for drugs. And 85 percent of them would happily become a National Police force. Apparently very few had ever heard of the Posse comitatus Act of 1878 forbidding military use against citizens without declaration of Martial Law.

All of the above crap, from Franks to the questionnaire, evolves out of something called the Revolution in Military Affairs, or simply RMA; the notion that the mechanics and nature of warfare have changed so much because of advances in technology and societal change that it was time to examine the military belly button. What they came up with was scary as hell, and it is expressed in a whole new catalog of military terms never before used. I list rather a lot of them in the Defensive Field Guide as part of a list of 500 Political Control Technology terms and technologies. Here are just a few of the RMA terms which reveal military’s thinking about their role and yours in our near future. You won’t like it.

People’s War.This term first appeared in an article on RMA in Parameters, the Army War College publication. It was quoted in The Spotlight, now defunct. From memory I paraphrase with no liberties taken. None are needed. It stated that People’s War was one of the most likely kind of war on the immediate horizon that would be new and unique. It defined it specifically as combat with Constitutionalists, ex military, survivalists, the poor and disenfranchised, and patriots. Excuse the hell out of me? How does that jive with their oath of office? Why should we allow them to retain force of arms with that kind of fuzzy logic running around loose under their helmets?

Here’s another term. 21st Century Politico-Military Force Matrix. That means that there are a range of alternative ‘forces’ which can be applied by politicians against a target group (e.g., civilians) to effect and enforce ‘policy.’ Police, military, intelligence, lethal, non lethal, psyops, disinformation, and on and on, are elements which can be employed: He who uses the best and most appropriate choices wins. Yeah… like Franks won at WACO!

But what does this all have to do with six people, and who are they?

Simple. The five Joint Chiefs of Staff, and one other person are the six, and they are all that is needed to launch a takeover via martial law in this country. The sixth could be any one of several people. The President of the United States is the most logical sixth, but the Vice President and the Speaker of the House, and a finite list of others could also be the sixth depending on who is incapacitated in that list, be it intentionally arranged for convenience’s sake, or by happenstance. But that is not all.

There are numerous laws passed by Congress and Presidential Executive Orders which have been passed to create and activate FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Currently, the United States still stands in a State of Emergency declared by President Bush for 9-11 which has never been rescinded. Technically, the head of FEMA could arbitrarily pick up the phone and arrange for martial law, but again, this would not likely take place without first eliminating the President. In fact, a terrorist event which eliminated the President might be just the things… allowing both Tommy Franks and FEMA to go marching along the same goose-step toward a Fascist police state. Of course, it could be FEMA which gets the phone call from someone in the Pentagon… “We are going ahead according to plan tomorrow morning at 0800 Zulu.”

Welcome to the NewStates of America. Oh, didn’t you know? The Constitution of the NewStates of America has already been written. Remember Bill Cooper, former Naval Intelligence Officer turned whistleblower. He uncovered it. You can find it in his book, Behold a Pale Horse, or in my book, Fatal Rebirth, where it is fully analyzed to reveal the Fascist tool it is. Bill said they spent $25M writing the document at an intelligence community (NWO) sponsored think tank. You don’t suppose they would go to all that trouble if they didn’t think they had a way to use it, do you?

Now take a look at the final post in this series: The Citizen’s Viewpoint.

%d bloggers like this: