| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Last Saturday, Vice President Dick Cheney, an experienced hunter, was
hunting quail with several well-heeled Republican acquaintances, including Texas lawyer Harry Whittington. The two men had been drinking throughout the afternoon, and at one point began to quarrel about a business venture of mutual interest which had gone awry. The argument became heated. Whittington sneered at Cheney?s declining public standing and the most recent disclosure, by Cheney?s former chief of staff Lewis Libby, that Libby had leaked classified information to the press at Cheney?s direction. When Cheney responded with an obscenity-laced remark, Whittington, a man who knows where many bodies are buried in Texas politics and business, suggested he might arrange for certain facts of a sensitive nature to become public knowledge. Cheney, enraged, stormed away, then turned, lowered his shotgun and discharged it, hitting Whittington?s face and upper body. Is that what happened on February 14 at the Armstrong Ranch in southern Texas? We have no idea, but it is no less likely than the official explanation. And the ?angry drunk? scenario would more plausibly explain both the long delay in reporting the event?which made it conveniently impossible to perform the blood alcohol test that would otherwise be routine in such an incident?and the obvious disarray in the White House for days afterwards. For all the media attention to the Cheney affair, it is remarkable that with virtual unanimity the official claim that the shooting was accidental has been uncritically accepted and reported as though it were established fact, despite the lack of any serious investigation or public presentation of the actual circumstances in which the vice president of the United States shot and seriously wounded another man. Until the migration of one of the shotgun pellets lodged in Whittington?s body triggered a heart attack on Tuesday, the incident was largely dismissed with joking references to the ?gang that couldn?t shoot straight? or criticism of a poor White House communications strategy. Even after the shift to a more serious tone, the major daily newspapers and the television networks continue to refer to the incident as an ?accidental shooting,? without either interviewing eyewitnesses or investigating any alternative theory of what took place. With Cheney?s interview Wednesday evening on Fox television, two conflicting accounts of the shooting have now been given. Kathleen Armstrong, daughter of multimillionaire ranch owner Anne Armstrong, a former ambassador in the Reagan administration, contacted a Corpus Christi, Texas newspaper Sunday to report Whittington had been shot accidentally. She put the responsibility for the incident on Whittington, indicating that he had wandered off the line maintained by his hunting partners and failed to announce himself when he returned from retrieving a quail. Three days later, Cheney abandoned the ?blame the victim? story and told Fox interviewer Britt Hume that he was the one responsible because he had pulled the trigger. Cheney also admitted to having a drink earlier that day, although he said it was only a single beer at lunch, five hours before the shooting. He denied that any alcohol was being consumed on the hunt. Cheney made an even more damaging admission, remarking that he ?didn?t know until Sunday morning that Harry was going to be all right.? This throws a different light on the decision not to make public any information about the shooting for nearly a full day. During that period, when Cheney and his aides could not be sure whether the vice president might be facing involuntary manslaughter charges, there were undoubtedly discussions about how to handle the story?perhaps even consideration of whether someone else might have to take the fall for the shooting. Only after Whittington was out of immediate danger was the press contacted with the news that Cheney had been the shooter. The police were also kept away during the first critical half-day. Secret Service agents contacted the local sheriff?s department immediately to report a shooting accident, but there is no indication that they supplied any details or identified the shooter. A captain in the sheriff?s department went to the ranch Saturday evening but was told the victim had been transported to a hospital in Corpus Christi. He left without interviewing any eyewitness. Two local policemen also arrived at the ranch, after learning of the shooting, but they were denied admission by ranch security guards, and went their way. Finally, at 8 a.m. Sunday?after Cheney had been assured that Whittington would survive?the vice president was interviewed by a sheriff?s deputy and made his first declaration that he had pulled the trigger. What is known about the circumstances of the shooting cast some doubt on the accident theory, especially given Cheney?s long experience as a hunter and the relative rarity of such incidents?only a handful during the most recent Texas hunting season. According to the account Cheney gave to Fox, Whittington was partially obscured because he was standing in a gully lower than the ground on which Cheney was standing. This suggests that Cheney, in order to hit Whittington, would have had to fire his blast either level or slightly downwards?a strange angle for shooting at a flushed quail rising into the sky. Press accounts suggest that Whittington was hit by as many as 150 to 200 pellets, meaning that he received nearly the full charge of birdshot from a single blast. This fact and the nature of the wounds seem to confirm the reports that Whittington was standing about 30 yards from Cheney when the vice president opened fi any closer, and the wounds would have been far more serious; much further away, and dispersion would have caused many of the shot pellets to miss. There are other aspects of the incident which appear to undercut the ?pure accident? theory. How could such an accident occur when the vice president was accompanied by his normal entourage of Secret Service and medical personnel? The role of the Secret Service is particularly puzzling: if Whittington was in range of Cheney?s gun, then Cheney was likewise in range of Whittington?s. How could the Secret Service have been unaware that a man armed with a loaded shotgun was approaching the vice president from an unexpected direction? If they were aware of Whittington?s movements, how could they have allowed the vice president to open fire on him? Whittington?s turn for the worse on Tuesday morning raises the possibility that he could suffer long-term physical consequences from the shooting, or even death. In either event, Cheney could be liable for criminal charges involving at least negligence and recklessness, or even involuntary manslaughter, a felony charge never before brought against so high-ranking a public official. His continuation in office under such circumstances would be in question. The press, however, has been virtually silent on this possibility. It has focused almost entirely on the subsequent handling of the public relations fallout, not on the underlying event in which a man was nearly killed by the vice president. In a rare exception, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, in a commentary Wednesday devoted to the exposure of illegal NSA spying, remarked in passing: ?Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy?s delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969. That story, and dozens of others about the Kennedy family, illustrates how wealthy, powerful people can behave as if they are above the law.? The comparison is an apt one, not only in its implicit questioning of the credibility of the account given by Cheney, but in its reference to the seeming immunity of the top echelons of American society from all normal legal and social constraints. There is indeed one law for the masses of ordinary people and quite another for the financial and political elite. If anything, this is more the case in the far more socially polarized America of 2006 than it was nearly four decades ago. Cheney?s four-day silence demonstrated the vice president?s arrogant indifference to public opinion. His eventual decision to give an interview with Fox News expresses both contempt for the public?s right to know and personal cowardice?Cheney is willing to be questioned only by a network which has repeatedly demonstrated a slavish political loyalty to the Bush administration and its ultra-right policies. The rejection of accountability?for the 9/11 attacks, for the lies which were used to engineer the war with Iraq, for the failures in the response to Hurricane Katrina, for the devastating social and fiscal impact of Bush?s tax cuts for the wealthy?is the hallmark not only of an administration, but of the ruling elite as a whole. In that sense, Cheney?s conduct at the Armstrong Ranch and its presentation by the media provide a vivid example of the social relations that prevail in contemporary America, ruled by a financial oligarchy that feels itself as far above the common people as the Russian Tsar or the French aristocracy before 1789. There is one set of laws, one set of prerogatives for the modern equivalent of the ruling estates of the feudal past, and another for the rabble. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote:
We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
It sure is great to have you tell us how it really is. Now, how about
telling us the "truth" about American Idol. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
"Mike Smith" wrote in message ... On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith Well done Isn't it amazing how much effort they spend proving it to us over and over. It's unfortunate that they are so talented at generating a lot of words to compensate for their lacks. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
He sure did yammer a lot, didn't he? Tom
SaPeIsMa wrote: "Mike Smith" wrote in message ... On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith Well done Isn't it amazing how much effort they spend proving it to us over and over. It's unfortunate that they are so talented at generating a lot of words to compensate for their lacks. |
OT- CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
SaPeIsMa wrote: "Mike Smith" wrote in message ... On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith Well done Isn't it amazing how much effort they spend proving it to us over and over. It's unfortunate that they are so talented at generating a lot of words to compensate for their lacks. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
|
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 07:30:23 -0600, "SaPeIsMa"
wrote: Isn't it amazing how much effort they spend proving it to us over and over. Isn't it amazing how few people have the brains to know that this is not a forum for red-neck politics, but a woodworking newsgroup. I mean, how bloody stupid can you get? |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Yeah, almost as stupid as the Vince Foster "conspiracy" the wingnut
media used to drag down the gravel road behind a pickup. I don't know about the rest of this stuff but I got ten bucks says alcohol/sh!*-facedness is the root of it all. I haven't hunted since I was a teenager/early twenties on the farm. My friends and I never had hunting classes/training and never did anything as STUPID or IRRESPONSIBLE as this. Couse then again we were SOBER. I find it interesting that Dick saw the need to mention he had one beer at lunch. Yeah, right. And you put off your interview with the police how long? Mike Smith wrote: On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
I WOULD RATHER HUNT WITH DICK CHENY THAN RIDE WITH TED KENNEDY
|
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
i too am sick and tired of the liberals crying conspiracy here!
Cheney is a smart man. noone, NO ONE, not even a yankee as dumb as ted kennedy would EVER try to kill someone with 28 guage bird shot at 30 yds. what a bunch of idiots! quail rarely fly "straight up". they are ground-dwellers and never fly any distance , they simply bolt at low altitude about 50 yds or so and land again. david www.dcgphotography.com |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:54:40 GMT, Mike Smith wrote:
On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith ============================ Have to agree Mike... VERY stupid...! Bob |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Remember, years ago, when this site was about woodworking?
|
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Take the tinfoil off your head and get a life.
wrote in message oups.com... Last Saturday, Vice President Dick Cheney, an experienced hunter, was hunting quail with several well-heeled Republican acquaintances, including Texas lawyer Harry Whittington. The two men had been drinking throughout the afternoon, and at one point began to quarrel about a business venture of mutual interest which had gone awry. The argument became heated. Whittington sneered at Cheney?s declining public standing and the most recent disclosure, by Cheney?s former chief of staff Lewis Libby, that Libby had leaked classified information to the press at Cheney?s direction. When Cheney responded with an obscenity-laced remark, Whittington, a man who knows where many bodies are buried in Texas politics and business, suggested he might arrange for certain facts of a sensitive nature to become public knowledge. Cheney, enraged, stormed away, then turned, lowered his shotgun and discharged it, hitting Whittington?s face and upper body. Is that what happened on February 14 at the Armstrong Ranch in southern Texas? We have no idea, but it is no less likely than the official explanation. And the ?angry drunk? scenario would more plausibly explain both the long delay in reporting the event?which made it conveniently impossible to perform the blood alcohol test that would otherwise be routine in such an incident?and the obvious disarray in the White House for days afterwards. For all the media attention to the Cheney affair, it is remarkable that with virtual unanimity the official claim that the shooting was accidental has been uncritically accepted and reported as though it were established fact, despite the lack of any serious investigation or public presentation of the actual circumstances in which the vice president of the United States shot and seriously wounded another man. Until the migration of one of the shotgun pellets lodged in Whittington?s body triggered a heart attack on Tuesday, the incident was largely dismissed with joking references to the ?gang that couldn?t shoot straight? or criticism of a poor White House communications strategy. Even after the shift to a more serious tone, the major daily newspapers and the television networks continue to refer to the incident as an ?accidental shooting,? without either interviewing eyewitnesses or investigating any alternative theory of what took place. With Cheney?s interview Wednesday evening on Fox television, two conflicting accounts of the shooting have now been given. Kathleen Armstrong, daughter of multimillionaire ranch owner Anne Armstrong, a former ambassador in the Reagan administration, contacted a Corpus Christi, Texas newspaper Sunday to report Whittington had been shot accidentally. She put the responsibility for the incident on Whittington, indicating that he had wandered off the line maintained by his hunting partners and failed to announce himself when he returned from retrieving a quail. Three days later, Cheney abandoned the ?blame the victim? story and told Fox interviewer Britt Hume that he was the one responsible because he had pulled the trigger. Cheney also admitted to having a drink earlier that day, although he said it was only a single beer at lunch, five hours before the shooting. He denied that any alcohol was being consumed on the hunt. Cheney made an even more damaging admission, remarking that he ?didn?t know until Sunday morning that Harry was going to be all right.? This throws a different light on the decision not to make public any information about the shooting for nearly a full day. During that period, when Cheney and his aides could not be sure whether the vice president might be facing involuntary manslaughter charges, there were undoubtedly discussions about how to handle the story?perhaps even consideration of whether someone else might have to take the fall for the shooting. Only after Whittington was out of immediate danger was the press contacted with the news that Cheney had been the shooter. The police were also kept away during the first critical half-day. Secret Service agents contacted the local sheriff?s department immediately to report a shooting accident, but there is no indication that they supplied any details or identified the shooter. A captain in the sheriff?s department went to the ranch Saturday evening but was told the victim had been transported to a hospital in Corpus Christi. He left without interviewing any eyewitness. Two local policemen also arrived at the ranch, after learning of the shooting, but they were denied admission by ranch security guards, and went their way. Finally, at 8 a.m. Sunday?after Cheney had been assured that Whittington would survive?the vice president was interviewed by a sheriff?s deputy and made his first declaration that he had pulled the trigger. What is known about the circumstances of the shooting cast some doubt on the accident theory, especially given Cheney?s long experience as a hunter and the relative rarity of such incidents?only a handful during the most recent Texas hunting season. According to the account Cheney gave to Fox, Whittington was partially obscured because he was standing in a gully lower than the ground on which Cheney was standing. This suggests that Cheney, in order to hit Whittington, would have had to fire his blast either level or slightly downwards?a strange angle for shooting at a flushed quail rising into the sky. Press accounts suggest that Whittington was hit by as many as 150 to 200 pellets, meaning that he received nearly the full charge of birdshot from a single blast. This fact and the nature of the wounds seem to confirm the reports that Whittington was standing about 30 yards from Cheney when the vice president opened fi any closer, and the wounds would have been far more serious; much further away, and dispersion would have caused many of the shot pellets to miss. There are other aspects of the incident which appear to undercut the ?pure accident? theory. How could such an accident occur when the vice president was accompanied by his normal entourage of Secret Service and medical personnel? The role of the Secret Service is particularly puzzling: if Whittington was in range of Cheney?s gun, then Cheney was likewise in range of Whittington?s. How could the Secret Service have been unaware that a man armed with a loaded shotgun was approaching the vice president from an unexpected direction? If they were aware of Whittington?s movements, how could they have allowed the vice president to open fire on him? Whittington?s turn for the worse on Tuesday morning raises the possibility that he could suffer long-term physical consequences from the shooting, or even death. In either event, Cheney could be liable for criminal charges involving at least negligence and recklessness, or even involuntary manslaughter, a felony charge never before brought against so high-ranking a public official. His continuation in office under such circumstances would be in question. The press, however, has been virtually silent on this possibility. It has focused almost entirely on the subsequent handling of the public relations fallout, not on the underlying event in which a man was nearly killed by the vice president. In a rare exception, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, in a commentary Wednesday devoted to the exposure of illegal NSA spying, remarked in passing: ?Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy?s delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969. That story, and dozens of others about the Kennedy family, illustrates how wealthy, powerful people can behave as if they are above the law.? The comparison is an apt one, not only in its implicit questioning of the credibility of the account given by Cheney, but in its reference to the seeming immunity of the top echelons of American society from all normal legal and social constraints. There is indeed one law for the masses of ordinary people and quite another for the financial and political elite. If anything, this is more the case in the far more socially polarized America of 2006 than it was nearly four decades ago. Cheney?s four-day silence demonstrated the vice president?s arrogant indifference to public opinion. His eventual decision to give an interview with Fox News expresses both contempt for the public?s right to know and personal cowardice?Cheney is willing to be questioned only by a network which has repeatedly demonstrated a slavish political loyalty to the Bush administration and its ultra-right policies. The rejection of accountability?for the 9/11 attacks, for the lies which were used to engineer the war with Iraq, for the failures in the response to Hurricane Katrina, for the devastating social and fiscal impact of Bush?s tax cuts for the wealthy?is the hallmark not only of an administration, but of the ruling elite as a whole. In that sense, Cheney?s conduct at the Armstrong Ranch and its presentation by the media provide a vivid example of the social relations that prevail in contemporary America, ruled by a financial oligarchy that feels itself as far above the common people as the Russian Tsar or the French aristocracy before 1789. There is one set of laws, one set of prerogatives for the modern equivalent of the ruling estates of the feudal past, and another for the rabble. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !? National Inquirer?
wrote in message oups.com... How sad it must be to have no friends. Go to the mountain and play with your friend sweetie. -- IMPORTANT: This post is intended for the use of the individual group(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this warning, it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the transmission of this email, although the kelpie next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Mapanari wrote:
Mike Smith wrotenews:atp8v197hatfdoq18e4fpninkgkfc180sn@ 4ax.com: On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith The fact that this story has any legs at all goes to show have far the liberals have dumbed down everything in America. Are the liberals really that desperate to lose another and yet another electoin in an unended stream of defeats? What next? 28 Guagegate? I have to disagree with you. Im a liberal and I don't feel desperate at all. If you had said democrats rathar than liberals then your statement would be true. In other words this is about politics not policy. The story is probably doctored. Everything from the White house is doctored. However, I don't think there is much blood in this turnip to be squeezing it so hard... -- Thank you, "Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard." Ecclesiastes 9:16 |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Of course the story is doctored. Full of lies, if you will. It's a
troll. dnoyeB wrote: Mapanari wrote: Mike Smith wrotenews:atp8v197hatfdoq18e4fpninkgkfc180sn@ 4ax.com: On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith The fact that this story has any legs at all goes to show have far the liberals have dumbed down everything in America. Are the liberals really that desperate to lose another and yet another electoin in an unended stream of defeats? What next? 28 Guagegate? I have to disagree with you. Im a liberal and I don't feel desperate at all. If you had said democrats rathar than liberals then your statement would be true. In other words this is about politics not policy. The story is probably doctored. Everything from the White house is doctored. However, I don't think there is much blood in this turnip to be squeezing it so hard... -- Thank you, "Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard." Ecclesiastes 9:16 |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Not really. But it does that various seeming right-wingers are kinda
hyper-sensitive about one of "theirs" getting treatment similar to what they deem appropriate to the opposition. Grow up, and get over it- these folks have made it a part of the territory. Cheney has only compounded his own problem. You forget, in all this liberal-labeling, that the center is where the votes are. You might say "It's the center, stupid!" Not the neo-cons or other wingnuts. J |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the
trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve wrote in message oups.com... Last Saturday, Vice President Dick Cheney, an experienced hunter, was hunting quail with several well-heeled Republican acquaintances, including Texas lawyer Harry Whittington. The two men had been drinking throughout the afternoon, and at one point began to quarrel about a business venture of mutual interest which had gone awry. The argument became heated. Whittington sneered at Cheney?s declining public standing and the most recent disclosure, by Cheney?s former chief of staff Lewis Libby, that Libby had leaked classified information to the press at Cheney?s direction. When Cheney responded with an obscenity-laced remark, Whittington, a man who knows where many bodies are buried in Texas politics and business, suggested he might arrange for certain facts of a sensitive nature to become public knowledge. Cheney, enraged, stormed away, then turned, lowered his shotgun and discharged it, hitting Whittington?s face and upper body. Is that what happened on February 14 at the Armstrong Ranch in southern Texas? We have no idea, but it is no less likely than the official explanation. And the ?angry drunk? scenario would more plausibly explain both the long delay in reporting the event?which made it conveniently impossible to perform the blood alcohol test that would otherwise be routine in such an incident?and the obvious disarray in the White House for days afterwards. For all the media attention to the Cheney affair, it is remarkable that with virtual unanimity the official claim that the shooting was accidental has been uncritically accepted and reported as though it were established fact, despite the lack of any serious investigation or public presentation of the actual circumstances in which the vice president of the United States shot and seriously wounded another man. Until the migration of one of the shotgun pellets lodged in Whittington?s body triggered a heart attack on Tuesday, the incident was largely dismissed with joking references to the ?gang that couldn?t shoot straight? or criticism of a poor White House communications strategy. Even after the shift to a more serious tone, the major daily newspapers and the television networks continue to refer to the incident as an ?accidental shooting,? without either interviewing eyewitnesses or investigating any alternative theory of what took place. With Cheney?s interview Wednesday evening on Fox television, two conflicting accounts of the shooting have now been given. Kathleen Armstrong, daughter of multimillionaire ranch owner Anne Armstrong, a former ambassador in the Reagan administration, contacted a Corpus Christi, Texas newspaper Sunday to report Whittington had been shot accidentally. She put the responsibility for the incident on Whittington, indicating that he had wandered off the line maintained by his hunting partners and failed to announce himself when he returned from retrieving a quail. Three days later, Cheney abandoned the ?blame the victim? story and told Fox interviewer Britt Hume that he was the one responsible because he had pulled the trigger. Cheney also admitted to having a drink earlier that day, although he said it was only a single beer at lunch, five hours before the shooting. He denied that any alcohol was being consumed on the hunt. Cheney made an even more damaging admission, remarking that he ?didn?t know until Sunday morning that Harry was going to be all right.? This throws a different light on the decision not to make public any information about the shooting for nearly a full day. During that period, when Cheney and his aides could not be sure whether the vice president might be facing involuntary manslaughter charges, there were undoubtedly discussions about how to handle the story?perhaps even consideration of whether someone else might have to take the fall for the shooting. Only after Whittington was out of immediate danger was the press contacted with the news that Cheney had been the shooter. The police were also kept away during the first critical half-day. Secret Service agents contacted the local sheriff?s department immediately to report a shooting accident, but there is no indication that they supplied any details or identified the shooter. A captain in the sheriff?s department went to the ranch Saturday evening but was told the victim had been transported to a hospital in Corpus Christi. He left without interviewing any eyewitness. Two local policemen also arrived at the ranch, after learning of the shooting, but they were denied admission by ranch security guards, and went their way. Finally, at 8 a.m. Sunday?after Cheney had been assured that Whittington would survive?the vice president was interviewed by a sheriff?s deputy and made his first declaration that he had pulled the trigger. What is known about the circumstances of the shooting cast some doubt on the accident theory, especially given Cheney?s long experience as a hunter and the relative rarity of such incidents?only a handful during the most recent Texas hunting season. According to the account Cheney gave to Fox, Whittington was partially obscured because he was standing in a gully lower than the ground on which Cheney was standing. This suggests that Cheney, in order to hit Whittington, would have had to fire his blast either level or slightly downwards?a strange angle for shooting at a flushed quail rising into the sky. Press accounts suggest that Whittington was hit by as many as 150 to 200 pellets, meaning that he received nearly the full charge of birdshot from a single blast. This fact and the nature of the wounds seem to confirm the reports that Whittington was standing about 30 yards from Cheney when the vice president opened fi any closer, and the wounds would have been far more serious; much further away, and dispersion would have caused many of the shot pellets to miss. There are other aspects of the incident which appear to undercut the ?pure accident? theory. How could such an accident occur when the vice president was accompanied by his normal entourage of Secret Service and medical personnel? The role of the Secret Service is particularly puzzling: if Whittington was in range of Cheney?s gun, then Cheney was likewise in range of Whittington?s. How could the Secret Service have been unaware that a man armed with a loaded shotgun was approaching the vice president from an unexpected direction? If they were aware of Whittington?s movements, how could they have allowed the vice president to open fire on him? Whittington?s turn for the worse on Tuesday morning raises the possibility that he could suffer long-term physical consequences from the shooting, or even death. In either event, Cheney could be liable for criminal charges involving at least negligence and recklessness, or even involuntary manslaughter, a felony charge never before brought against so high-ranking a public official. His continuation in office under such circumstances would be in question. The press, however, has been virtually silent on this possibility. It has focused almost entirely on the subsequent handling of the public relations fallout, not on the underlying event in which a man was nearly killed by the vice president. In a rare exception, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, in a commentary Wednesday devoted to the exposure of illegal NSA spying, remarked in passing: ?Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy?s delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969. That story, and dozens of others about the Kennedy family, illustrates how wealthy, powerful people can behave as if they are above the law.? The comparison is an apt one, not only in its implicit questioning of the credibility of the account given by Cheney, but in its reference to the seeming immunity of the top echelons of American society from all normal legal and social constraints. There is indeed one law for the masses of ordinary people and quite another for the financial and political elite. If anything, this is more the case in the far more socially polarized America of 2006 than it was nearly four decades ago. Cheney?s four-day silence demonstrated the vice president?s arrogant indifference to public opinion. His eventual decision to give an interview with Fox News expresses both contempt for the public?s right to know and personal cowardice?Cheney is willing to be questioned only by a network which has repeatedly demonstrated a slavish political loyalty to the Bush administration and its ultra-right policies. The rejection of accountability?for the 9/11 attacks, for the lies which were used to engineer the war with Iraq, for the failures in the response to Hurricane Katrina, for the devastating social and fiscal impact of Bush?s tax cuts for the wealthy?is the hallmark not only of an administration, but of the ruling elite as a whole. In that sense, Cheney?s conduct at the Armstrong Ranch and its presentation by the media provide a vivid example of the social relations that prevail in contemporary America, ruled by a financial oligarchy that feels itself as far above the common people as the Russian Tsar or the French aristocracy before 1789. There is one set of laws, one set of prerogatives for the modern equivalent of the ruling estates of the feudal past, and another for the rabble. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Mapanari wrote:
The liberals, communists and socialists control all the media. From some I hear the media is controled by the leftist elite, then from others I hear about the media in bed with those crazy right wingers and all their Jew friends. Personally, I get my news from Jay Leno... at least he has a sense of humor ;-) Joe Barta |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Another perfect man heard from, lots of them come out of the woodwork
when someone else makes a mistake. How many words did you misuse and misspell in your post? Perfection is great and basic. "Steve Peterson" wrote in message link.net... Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Mapanari wrote:
Not even close. The liberals, communists and socialists control all the media. That's funny. Ann Coulter doesn't seem to be in agreement with you on that: http://www.oliverwillis.com/wp-conte...vethemedia.mp3 I shoulda stayed out of this stupid thread. A stupid post by someone with no skepticism is answered by shrill cries against the "liberal establishment". As though he were representative. JUST LIKE HIM, you all have difficulties with critical analysis. You all deserve eachother. er -- email not valid |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Steve Peterson wrote:
Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve I thought that Whittington hadn't announced his return to the line from retrieving a bird. yes? no? I'm not a hunter and am just repeating what I remember from the news yesterday. And of course Cheney is ultimately responsible, which he already admitted. dave |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
David wrote:
I thought that Whittington hadn't announced his return to the line from retrieving a bird. yes? no? I'm not a hunter and am just repeating what I remember from the news yesterday. And of course Cheney is ultimately responsible, which he already admitted. I look at it as being just like a car accident: there are always degrees of fault. Cheney ran the light, and Whittington didn't look for crazies while approaching it. er -- email not valid |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
"Dad" writes:
Another perfect man heard from, lots of them come out of the woodwork when someone else makes a mistake. How many words did you misuse and misspell in your post? Perfection is great and basic. Perfection has nothing to do with it. It's basic hunter safety. Something that when I was in Jr. High, all males were required to take (northern wisconsin, early 70's). While I disagree with Mr. Cheney on just about everything, he did the right thing when he stated that he, and he alone was responsible for the accidental shooting. He should be admired for that. scott "Steve Peterson" wrote in message hlink.net... Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
what a bunch of idiots! quail rarely fly "straight up". they are
ground-dwellers and never fly any distance , they simply bolt at low altitude about 50 yds or so and land again You've obviously never seen a quail before. In any case, it's disgusting how the news media and the sound-bite-specialist Democrats are chomping on this little incident like blood-crazed sharks. Disgusting, but not surprising. The instant I heard about this, I thought, "Oh, lord, here it comes...." Sigh. Ron M. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Enoch wrote: snipCheney ran the light, and Whittington didn't look for
crazies while approaching it.snip This is true when relating to traffic issues. There are NO green lights, people. Seriously. Tom |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Punctuation mistakes are acceptable to a certain degree. Shooting
other people while hunting type mistakes are not. It's too bad you do not see a difference. On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:16:26 -0500, "Dad" wrote: Another perfect man heard from, lots of them come out of the woodwork when someone else makes a mistake. How many words did you misuse and misspell in your post? Perfection is great and basic. "Steve Peterson" wrote in message hlink.net... Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, almost as stupid as the Vince Foster "conspiracy" the wingnut media used to drag down the gravel road behind a pickup. I don't know about the rest of this stuff but I got ten bucks says alcohol/sh!*-facedness is the root of it all. I haven't hunted since I was a teenager/early twenties on the farm. My friends and I never had hunting classes/training and never did anything as STUPID or IRRESPONSIBLE as this. Couse then again we were SOBER. I find it interesting that Dick saw the need to mention he had one beer at lunch. Yeah, right. And you put off your interview with the police how long? That's it--it's unbelievable. That's why the possibility of Cheney being the patsy has to be considered. Despite his political and criminal weight, the Elite over him who did the other assassinations have even more. Look for Cheney to step down within the week.....which is obviously part of the deal. There's definitely a coverup--the story is impossible. Mike Smith wrote: On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message . com... Perfection has nothing to do with it. It's basic hunter safety. Something that when I was in Jr. High, all males were required to take (northern wisconsin, early 70's). While I disagree with Mr. Cheney on just about everything, he did the right thing when he stated that he, and he alone was responsible for the accidental shooting. He should be admired for that. scott Never been Quail hunting, have you? You mean the politely correct safety classes put on by the pussy's that want to cover their ass? If you had to take one to handle a gun you shouldn't be allowed to have one. -- Dad One more gun is just enough, maybe. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
|
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Not exactly, just be glad you were not a good friend of the Clinton's.
Remember that it took Hilly over 30 hours to remember the suicide note from her lawyer Vince? Here a few more that didn't make it through the Clinton years. James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation. Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House. Vince Foster - Former white House councilor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide. Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors. C. Victor Raiser II - Montgomery Raiser, Major players in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992. Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992. Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor". Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in VA of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events. Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He Allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house. James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It Was reported that he had a "Bl ack Book" of people which contained names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas. James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater. Kathy Ferguson, ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson, was found dead in May 1994, in her living room with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a codefendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones. Bill Shelton - Arkansas State Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave site of his fiancee. Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor. Florence Martin - Accountant & subcontractor for the CIA, was related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. He died of three gunshot wounds. Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death. Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident. Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparently, in the middle of his investigation. Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22,1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death. Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution TrustCorp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15, 1993. He was investigating the Morgan Guarantee scandal. Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce. Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash. Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a Small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother. Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena Arkansas, Death was no accident. Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of a car left at his repair shop. He was found dead after his car had hit a utility pole. Stanley Huggins - Investigated Madison Guarantee. His death was a reported suicide and his report was never released. Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded. Kevin Ives & Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. A controversial case, the initial report of death said, due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the 2 boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury. THE FOLLOWING PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES/HENRY CASE: Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck, 7/88. Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov., 1988. Gregory Collins -Died from a gunshot wound January 1989. Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989. James Milan - Found decapitated. However, the Coroner ruled his death was due to "natural causes". Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990. Richard Winters - A suspect in the Ives /Henry deaths. He was killed in a setup robbery July 1989. THE FOLLOWING CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD: Major William S. Barkley Jr. Captain Scott J. Reynolds Sgt. Brian Hanley Sgt. Tim Sabel Major General William Robertson Col. William Densberger Col. Robert Kelly Spec. Gary Rhodes Steve Willis Robert Williams Conway LeBleu Todd McKeehan "Mapanari" wrote in message ... wrotenews:1140114035.275564.164600 @g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: Not really. But it does that various seeming right-wingers are kinda hyper-sensitive about one of "theirs" getting treatment similar to what they deem appropriate to the opposition. Not even close. The liberals, communists and socialists control all the media. This is so silly, it should have been a laugher bit mention on the evening news. But when Bill Clinton lies before a federal grand jury and gets impeached, the screams, howls and virturpitude against normal Americans was tremendous, with "buh, buh, buh, it's just SEXXXXX wail" as the mantra to excuse the crime. When Nixon's aids lied before a grand jury, they went to jail, some for years. Grow up, and get over it- these folks have made it a part of the territory. Cheney has only compounded his own problem. What has he done? Not "answered questions" from the left wing media? They're like paparazzi...no matter what a white, republican, middle class, anti-immigration, mono-culturalist has to say, it's always wrong, sneared at, belittled and made fun of. He can't win. Why try? It'll just be spun, lied, edited and make out to be a fool, a criminal, Tony Soprano's brother or worse. You forget, in all this liberal-labeling, that the center is where the votes are. You might say "It's the center, stupid!" Not the neo-cons or other wingnuts. The "center" you like to call it, is what all liberals refer as "The vast right wing conspiracy". The center, from your viewpoint, is Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer and others. All others are flaming right wing fanatics, christians or worse. J -- b{-_-}d I'm listening! ---Mapanari--- |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
Been quail hunting most of my life. Still hunt many days a season. My old
man shot me about 25 years ago. Similar situation to what happened in TX last weekend with the VP. 'Cept I was facing the other way. Bad deal though, it hurt. Never thought about calling the fuzz and doing interviews, though. Seemed like it was just an accident. Them birds fly fast and low. I know he had no time to realize that I dropped off the line. My old man was concerned about whether I needed to go to the hospital though. Still got a few pieces of shot in my ass and a couple in my right calf. I'd get shot again, if it meant we could hunt together for another day. "Dad" wrote in message .. . "Scott Lurndal" wrote in message . com... Perfection has nothing to do with it. It's basic hunter safety. Something that when I was in Jr. High, all males were required to take (northern wisconsin, early 70's). While I disagree with Mr. Cheney on just about everything, he did the right thing when he stated that he, and he alone was responsible for the accidental shooting. He should be admired for that. scott Never been Quail hunting, have you? You mean the politely correct safety classes put on by the pussy's that want to cover their ass? If you had to take one to handle a gun you shouldn't be allowed to have one. -- Dad One more gun is just enough, maybe. |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
I see you came over to a Guns Ng to spread your bull ****! Why don't you grow
up? Jim And yes this only deserves a top post! "iceman" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, almost as stupid as the Vince Foster "conspiracy" the wingnut media used to drag down the gravel road behind a pickup. I don't know about the rest of this stuff but I got ten bucks says alcohol/sh!*-facedness is the root of it all. I haven't hunted since I was a teenager/early twenties on the farm. My friends and I never had hunting classes/training and never did anything as STUPID or IRRESPONSIBLE as this. Couse then again we were SOBER. I find it interesting that Dick saw the need to mention he had one beer at lunch. Yeah, right. And you put off your interview with the police how long? That's it--it's unbelievable. That's why the possibility of Cheney being the patsy has to be considered. Despite his political and criminal weight, the Elite over him who did the other assassinations have even more. Look for Cheney to step down within the week.....which is obviously part of the deal. There's definitely a coverup--the story is impossible. Mike Smith wrote: On 16 Feb 2006 03:26:47 -0800, wrote: We have no idea I boiled this rant down to it's essence. Yes, liberals and socialists are this stupid... Mike Smith |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
What another crack pot on a Guns NG?
Jim wrote in message oups.com... LIBERALS have smaller penisses... and Repugnicans are dimwit-pillocks. Cheney and your JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF burned 3000 of you and nuked the towers: http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier5.htm and you are falling for the PROPAGANDA that was carefully engineered to divide you and to divert attention. Your media LIES habitually and CENSORS facts and HIDES history... and thats because of the LOGIC OF CAPITALISM and not the fault of any one person. US COWARDS do not stand up to lies and deceit and FEAR FEAR the loss of petroleum.. and standard of life... and will losse it ANYWAY. Go on, HATE EACH OTHER. We Asians love to see that. DO NOT EVER wake up to your FBI-CIA-NRO-NSA-spook-MURDERERS secert government. Remember: who lives by the sword, will die by the sword. And: Who is not against me .. is with me. Joshua from Nazareth Who are not with us, are with the terrorists. Bush-Junta, (sounds like anti-christ? .. ) NEVER SHOW THESE VIDEOS to your neighbors, nor dare to discuss them. http://www.question911.com/links.php NEVER read this book: SYNTHETIC TERROR 911 WEBSTER TARPLEY http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2005/07/317436.pdf |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
"SgtSilicon" wrote in message ... Punctuation mistakes are acceptable to a certain degree. Shooting other people while hunting type mistakes are not. It's too bad you do not see a difference. We all see the difference between you and a sane man! Jim On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:16:26 -0500, "Dad" wrote: Another perfect man heard from, lots of them come out of the woodwork when someone else makes a mistake. How many words did you misuse and misspell in your post? Perfection is great and basic. "Steve Peterson" wrote in message thlink.net... Lets boil this down a little. Cheney has admitted that he pulled the trigger. He hasn't yet said anything about the fact that he aimed the shotgut. That is the key to this. If he were seriously hunting quail, they are small targets, moving fast. He should have been seeing his target before he shot; the presence of a large man dressed in orange should have obscured the target. New media keep saying he "accidently" show Whittingon; what they should be saying is he "carelessly" shot Whittington. I can think of some other modifiers. Too bad he missed out on basic training. Steve |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
"Guess who" wrote in message
... On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 07:30:23 -0600, "SaPeIsMa" wrote: Isn't it amazing how much effort they spend proving it to us over and over. Isn't it amazing how few people have the brains to know that this is not a forum for red-neck politics, but a woodworking newsgroup. I mean, how bloody stupid can you get? Threads like this make is supremely easy to block the newest crop of crossposting assholes, though. :) |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:31:22 -0800, "iceman"
wrote: wrote in message roups.com... Yeah, almost as stupid as the Vince Foster "conspiracy" the wingnut media used to drag down the gravel road behind a pickup. I don't know about the rest of this stuff but I got ten bucks says alcohol/sh!*-facedness is the root of it all. I haven't hunted since I was a teenager/early twenties on the farm. My friends and I never had hunting classes/training and never did anything as STUPID or IRRESPONSIBLE as this. Couse then again we were SOBER. I find it interesting that Dick saw the need to mention he had one beer at lunch. Yeah, right. And you put off your interview with the police how long? That's it--it's unbelievable. Yep, the barking moonbats are unbelievable... Totally stupid and willing to expose their obvious stupidity to the world. Amazing. Mike Smith |
CHENEY SHOT IN ANGER !?
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:18 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter