Posted on 05/12/2015 4:33:07 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
On Monday, Mitch Bates, the Garland police chief, clarified details of this shootout between the gunmen and five of his force’s officers.
Bates said that the officer and the security guard who were confronted by the armed gunmen were not in a police car, as was initially believed, but were standing by it when the gunmen drove up to a barricade and got out of their car.
In addition, Bates said that the Garland police officer, who has not been identified, shot the gunmen and wounded, rather than killed, both of them. Four SWAT members armed with assault rifles and pistols came over within seconds, Bates said, and after dozens of rounds were fired from police and the suspected shooters, both gunmen had been killed.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Follow the spin ... why are we learning this 10 days after ?
The bad guys are dead. I don’t care if an individual or a platoon sent them on their way. I’m satisfied with the end results.
It sounds to me like someone was saying what they were ordered to. The question is why.
The French shoot out at Charlie Hebdo was sorta one sided, meaning the bad guys had guns, the cops did not. The cops had bicycles, the bad guys vehicles.
I’m really glad we have not devolved deeper into leftism where not only citizens are unarmed, but the cops as well. The ISIS allies of the democrat party should realize most of us are armed and hopefully keep away.
A good tactic for ISIS to employ though, would be to use 100% Black ISIS terrorists, then the cops would not dare shoot back for fear of being jailed as racists.
Perhaps to protect the officer who killed them from retaliation?
There is a concept known as operational security. Of course, when the battlefield is the public square, it becomes more difficult to maintain. But, this is not a shocking revelation.
Maybe to let other wannabe’s out there know that swat snipers were there and not just one lone traffic cop for any future endeavors.
I was able to get in the first comment on the WaPo. If it gets a few likes, it will stay at the top all day.
My WaPo comment:
God Bless Texas, where they know how to deal with jihad terrorists. If the same situation had happened in a blue state, the results might have been catastrophic. And good for Pam Geller to hold the free speech rally in the exact same venue where Muslim jihad enablers and excusers held a pro-Sharia and anti-free-speech rally in January after the Charlie Hebdo attacks. “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Those who attack Pam Geller are simply cowards rationalizing their cowardice.
We must stand today for freedom, or in twenty years the cowards will be saying to women, “You provoked your rape. If you had not been flashing your long hair and curves, if you had been dressed modestly in a burka, you would not have been raped.”
Soros et al are actively trying to put Obama in a position to pass treaties that would affect greatly the import and sale of weapons here. I hate them both.
If that was the case, why wasn’t it mentioned in the initial report?
All kinds of liability when you go to having to protect and serve. Especially when the ones funding the protection are not idiots to the govt wiles.
With all the dust being kicked up, They probly should have left it alone. When you start looking at something with a magnifying glass you are liable to see some of the imperfections.
Kinda overkill to bum rush the Jihadies with SWAT when they were already wounded and rolling around on the ground, but hey, they definatly needed killin.
It makes sense. That doesn’t take away from the officer being a hero. That good thing is at the two perpetrators have assumed room temperature.
Why was not that the initial then? The officials were aware of the possibility of retaliation. Why lie initially and lose your credibility?
The question that remains unanswered is, were they lying then or are they lying now? Which begs the question, Why would they lie at all?
I thought Geller shot both of those ISASS wannabes?
“...Those who attack Pam Geller are simply cowards rationalizing their cowardice....”
Spot-on, Travis.
They lie so Americans won’t think a good guy with a gun can stop these monsters. It required the government.
The key problem I have with this story is the AUDIO only revealed 3 or 4 shots, NOT 12.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.