Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (181726)	2/14/2006 12:22:09 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<Every news report I've seen talks about how the guy should have warned Cheney when he approached. It seems to me that if you have the gun in your hand and there are only three guys in your party, you don't shoot at ground level unless you know where all three guys are. Especially when you're pulling a half circle and shooting behind yourself.>> The guy was supposed to be even with the other two and had fallen behind to retrieve a bird. Normally shooting behind the line is ok. I know when I hunted in a group in high brush we talked back and forth to keep track of where everyone was. One idiot says the rule is only shoot at birds where your gun is 30 degrees elevated from your shoulder. Fine for pheasants but quail fly about 4' off the ground.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (181726)	2/14/2006 12:39:09 PM
From: faqsnlojiks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The VP was armed with a 28gauge shotgun, and most likely #7 1/2 or #8 shot. It's been reported that the guy was hit from 30yds. Frankly, at that range, the pattern (depending on the choke used in the gun) was probably about 3-4feet in diameter. And being a 28ga, there couldn't have been very many pellets that actually hit. And the force of the shot couldn't have been that great. Effective killing range is typically 40yds...and that's for a little bird.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (181726)	2/14/2006 3:49:08 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I liked it too! That's two of us. It was quite tense in your report, waiting for Al Quail to break cover and attack on a suicide mission. Another bird hunt that amuses me is the dove shoot. Shooting doves for God's sake!! [Peace be upon him, and me too, but not the sort of peace that big Dick Cheney brings]. Meanwhile, the Ayatollah Joke Book: slate.com Excellent article by Michael Kinsley, complete with cartoons of Muhammed in bed with Adolf and Anne Frank. I'm not sure if it's Muhammed Ali or somebody else who is depicted. Maybe it's even the one who shall not be depicted or death will ensue [being a peaceful religion, death ensues a LOT]. Hmm, now I can't find them ... brb... Here are the originals, but I can't find the others yet... humaneventsonline.com The originals are not only benign, but quite good in that they show the rabidity of Moslems who indeed seem to have a bomb in their turbans. < LAS VEGAS--Of course it was a provocation. In September, the editor of a right-wing Danish newspaper decided "to test cartoonists to see if they were self-censoring their work, out of fear of violence from Islamic radicals." Though some declined, 12 artists accepted the editor's invitation to make light of the Prophet Mohammed, and submitted work equating Islam with terrorism and the oppression of women, among other things.> news.yahoo.com The main problem with the cartoons seems to be that they accuse Moslems of being violent. Which seems to be a reasonable proposition as shown by the reaction. I am waiting for Jews to go crazy because of Adolf in bed with Anne Frank. I'm not holding my breath. They seem to usually have more sense. <Being provoked, as I tell myself when I'm sitting next to Sean Hannity, doesn't justify reacting with violence. And as Kuwaiti oil executive Samia al-Duaij pointed out to Time, there are better reasons to torch embassies than over cartoons: "America kills thousands of Muslims, and you lose your head and withdraw ambassadors over a bunch of cartoons printed in a second-rate paper in a Nordic country with a population of five million? That's the true outrage." As the only syndicated political cartoonist who also writes a syndicated column, my living depends on freedom of the press. I can't decide who's a bigger threat: the deluded Islamists who hope to impose Sharia law on Western democracies, or the right-wing clash-of-civilization crusaders waving the banner of "free speech"--the same folks who call for the censorship and even murder of anti-Bush cartoonists here--as an excuse to join the post-9/11 Muslims-suck media pile-on. Most reasonable people reject both--but neither is as dangerous to liberty as America's self-censoring newspaper editors and broadcast producers. "CNN has chosen not to show the [Danish Mohammed] cartoons out of respect for Islam," said the news channel. "We always weigh the value of the journalistic impact against the impact that publication might have as far as insulting or hurting certain groups," said an editor at The San Francisco Chronicle. "The cartoons didn't meet our long-held standards for not moving offensive content," said the Associated Press. Bull----. If these cowards were worried about offending the faithful, they wouldn't cover or quote such Muslim-bashers as Ann Coulter, Christopher Hitchens or George W. Bush. The truth is, our national nanny media is managed by cowards so terrified by the prospect of their offices being firebombed that they wallow in self-censorship. > Mq