One of the most amazing things about this case is that even if we
accept without question the tale told by Cheney and Armstrong - if we
accept that this 'accident' occurred exactly as we have been told it
happened - it is perfectly obvious that the consensus media opinion
that there was no misconduct or negligence is simply untrue. By his own
account, Cheney was hunting by vehicle, a decidedly unsafe, and
unethical, practice. By his own account, he was out in a three-man
hunting party. By his own account, he made no effort to ascertain the
whereabouts of anyone else in his party before firing away. By his own
account, he was firing at a bird that would have had to have been
flying ridiculously low. By his own account, he swung his gun far
beyond "the mid-point" to take his shot. By his own account, he had
been drinking that day (undoubtedly far more than he has admitted to).
By his own account, he was hunting in flat terrain with a party that
included a hostess, two other hunters, several guides and outriders
(scouts on horseback), a medical team, and a Secret Service team -- and
yet he swung his gun around blindly a full 180=BA to take a shot at an
alleged bird that was supposedly flying just a few feet off the ground.
Read more at: http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/signs.php
.
|
