ADVERTISEMENT

Question for OiT

Not OiT. But just for fun, can anyone play? :)
I suppose I next need to address some of the questions that have come in concerning the “Cheney’s Got a Gun” newsletters. "Were you actually trying to say," inquiring minds want to know, "that we should believe those crazy stories about Cheney's passion for playing The Most Dangerous Game?"



Well ... uhmm ... yeah, I guess I was rather strongly implying it, without actually saying it. In retrospect, that seems a little wimpy. But explicitly leveling such accusations does tend to make one seem a bit mentally unbalanced, so I opted to be rather coy. However, as regular readers will recall, I have touched upon this topic once before, in Newsletter #50 (February 16, 2004), following the widely publicized Cheney/Scalia duck hunting trip:



This one is from the "things that make you go 'hmmm ...'" files.

A story that has been circulating in the conspiracy community for quite some time now holds that our back-up quarterback, Dick Cheney, has a fondness for playing "The Most Dangerous Game." In other words, he allegedly likes to, quite literally, hunt humans. Preferably young, naked, female humans. For sport.

I know what you're thinking, so let me just say that I don't make this stuff up. Nor do I vouch for its veracity. All that I am saying is that these claims have been made – albeit not, to my knowledge, by the most credible of sources. Nevertheless, what is being claimed is not beyond the realm of possibility. After all, what we are talking about here, on the one hand, is abhorrent and psychopathic behavior. And on the other hand, we are talking about Dick Cheney. These two things are not, quite obviously, mutually exclusive.

... Consider the following report from the venerable Los Angeles Times:

"Two Black Hawk helicopters were brought in and hovered nearby as Cheney and Scalia were whisked away in a heavily guarded motorcade to a secluded, private hunting camp owned by an oil industry businessman [identified as Wallace Carline, the head of Diamond Services Corp.] ... the Cheney-Scalia trip drew the attention of local officials because of the unusual security precautions ... on the morning of Jan. 5, a large security contingent was in place -- two Black Hawk air combat rescue helicopters, a line of armored sport utility vehicles and a ring of federal agents and sheriff's deputies who set up a security perimeter. The area was declared a no-fly zone for other aircraft ... Perry [Ken Perry, of the Perry Flying Center at the Harry P. Williams Airport] said Cheney was among the first to deplane, followed by Scalia and a young woman who was identified to Perry as one of the justice's daughters. Both Perry and Naquin [David Naquin, the local sheriff] said there were orders prohibiting photographs of those who exited the planes and climbed into the motorcade. But two days later, Cheney returned to the airport without Scalia, and photographs were allowed ... Scalia stayed on to hunt a few more days, the sheriff said, but local officials said it was unclear how he returned to Washington." [David G. Savage and Richard A. Serrano "Scalia Was Cheney Hunt Trip Guest," Los Angeles Times, February 5, 2004]


Uhmm, would it be considered rude to ask what happened to Scalia's 'daughter'? Why is there no mention of how she returned to Washington? And would Scalia really have brought his daughter along on such an outing? Since it wasn't a big secret that Scalia and Cheney were there, doesn't it seem reasonable to conclude that the ban on photographs was intended to protect the young woman's identity? And did Scalia really hang around to hunt for a few more days, despite the fact that, according to Sheriff Naquin, the hunting "was terrible. There were very few ducks killed."?

Is it possible that Scalia and Cheney opted to leave separately so as not to highlight the fact that someone in their party had gone missing? Since no one saw Scalia leave, then it follows that no one can confirm whether his 'daughter' left with him. And even if she did, doesn't this story, at the very least, have the makings of a good sex scandal? I mean, when two older guys and a young woman go duck hunting for a couple of days and no one brings back any ducks, people are going to talk. And if the two guys come back without ducks or the girl, then I think we could have a serious problem.


dicksbulge.jpg
That secretive, high-security hunting outing was the first indication that maybe those hushed rumors about Cheney weren't so crazy after all. The second clue surfaced in September of 2004, when the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel inadvertently published a rather, uhhh, revealing photograph of our illustrious vice president. But before discussing that further, I have to note here, for the uninformed, that the same women who have accused Cheney of having a fondness for hunting humans have also claimed that he is an unusually well-endowed man. Yes, that's right: Cheney not only is a big dick, he also allegedly has a big dick – which seems to be on display in the Sentinel photo to the right.


Of course, there are other explanations. Some have suggested that Big Dick was wearing a colostomy bag. Or maybe he had just taken a large dump in his shorts. Maybe he smuggles ferrets in his pants. Maybe he has a partially developed conjoined twin growing out of his left thigh. Or maybe, as his accusers have claimed, he really is packing a schlong that would make even Milton Berle and Tommy Lee feel inadequate.


According to an article that appeared in Milwaukee Magazine, what you see in the photo is exactly what it appears to be: "Guldan [the photographer who captured the image of Cheney on a campaign stop in Wisconsin] got a call from a reader the next day. 'Did you notice anything unusual about that picture?' the reader asked. Upon closer inspection, it seems the vice president’s smile was not his biggest, ahem, asset. Is that what we think it is? 'You’re not imagining it,' Guldan says of the unintentionally revealing photo. Let’s just say the snugness of Cheney’s pants left little to the imagination, and we’re not talking about his waistline."



The Journal Sentinel, by the way, has opted to deny all requests to reprint the copyrighted photo. Unauthorized scans of the newsprint version, however, have been known to circulate around the cyber world.



But what are we to make of them? Do they validate the women's stories? If the alleged witnesses are right about Cheney's, uhmm, endowments, then are they right about other things as well? Is there some other way they could have learned of Cheney's unusual assets? I don't claim to have the answers to those questions. All I'm saying is that maybe Cheney's curious duck hunting trip, and his even more curious quail hunting trip, provide disturbing clues to the nature of the world we live in.

Link NSFW (http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr82.html)
 
There was too much time between when he died and when they announced it. Right down on the border with Mexico. A logical assumption is a teenage Mexican boy was there when he expired and they had to sanitize the situation. The farther to the right they are in public the more likely they are to want to taste the forbidden fruit.
 
well, I agree of course with alex that the metaphor is that the constitution and the bill of rights has been murdered, regardless. jfk was murdered and America was murdered. but I also agree with douglas dietrich America was sold out in a treaty during ww2, and with G. Edward griffin, America's money and currency was murdered in 1913. so if he was or not, America is dying
 
I was a little surprised coast to coast am did not do a conspiracy theory show last night, I bet for sure alex does today at 4pm on his sunday show
 
well, I agree of course with alex that the metaphor is that the constitution and the bill of rights has been murdered, regardless. jfk was murdered and America was murdered. but I also agree with douglas dietrich America was sold out in a treaty during ww2, and with G. Edward griffin, America's money and currency was murdered in 1913. so if he was or not, America is dying
And the dish ran away with the spoon...........................................................................................................................................
 
And the dish ran away with the spoon...........................................................................................................................................
to the majority of people this is not fun games, not really a time for joking around, but to the non-awake, I could see where it might look silly
 
to the majority of people this is not fun games, not really a time for joking around, but to the non-awake, I could see where it might look silly
The obvious suspect is a champion of the Obama administration who finally snapped when Scalia provided the key vote delaying the president's plan to save the world by adjusting the climate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lucas80
The obvious suspect is a champion of the Obama administration who finally snapped when Scalia provided the key vote delaying the president's plan to save the world by adjusting the climate.
well, yeah but even if we have a death by natural causes, we are in for a big fight here. I cannot believe McConnell is finally standing up for something, too little too late. I would not put it past anyone in the Obama admin because they answer to the new world order, so did bush before him, and so will hill or jeb
 
well, yeah but even if we have a death by natural causes, we are in for a big fight here. I cannot believe McConnell is finally standing up for something, too little too late. I would not put it past anyone in the Obama admin because they answer to the new world order, so did bush before him, and so will hill or jeb
I read an interesting piece today by a lawyer arguing that the Senate is legally in recess, so if the president wants to appoint a justice without any oversight, he can do it.
 
I read an interesting piece today by a lawyer arguing that the Senate is legally in recess, so if the president wants to appoint a justice without any oversight, he can do it.
That would negate Republican obstructionism as a PR weapon. Republicans are reaching too high if they think the middle of America wants 9 months of obstructionism when it comes to a new justice being confirmed.
Scalia will lay in state at the Supreme Court, he'll be buried, and about 5 days after that Obama will name a replacement. Only the hyper activated on either side think a nomination should be delayed for political reasons for nine months.
 
That would negate Republican obstructionism as a PR weapon. Republicans are reaching too high if they think the middle of America wants 9 months of obstructionism when it comes to a new justice being confirmed.
Scalia will lay in state at the Supreme Court, he'll be buried, and about 5 days after that Obama will name a replacement. Only the hyper activated on either side think a nomination should be delayed for political reasons for nine months.
I thought I heard that Bush nominated Roberts 2 days after Rehnquist passed?
 
That would negate Republican obstructionism as a PR weapon. Republicans are reaching too high if they think the middle of America wants 9 months of obstructionism when it comes to a new justice being confirmed.
Scalia will lay in state at the Supreme Court, he'll be buried, and about 5 days after that Obama will name a replacement. Only the hyper activated on either side think a nomination should be delayed for political reasons for nine months.
Do you honestly think if things were reversed it would be different?
 
That would negate Republican obstructionism as a PR weapon. Republicans are reaching too high if they think the middle of America wants 9 months of obstructionism when it comes to a new justice being confirmed.
Scalia will lay in state at the Supreme Court, he'll be buried, and about 5 days after that Obama will name a replacement. Only the hyper activated on either side think a nomination should be delayed for political reasons for nine months.
No, the only way Obama will get another justice on SCOTUS is if he does it as a recess appointment or if he nominates a bona fide originalist. And Obama understands the politics -- he did, after all, try to filibuster Alioto and there was no good reason for that.
 
I will start paying attention when one conspiracy guy starts calling out another conspiracy guy for that guy's conspiracy being a conspiracy.
 
The obvious suspect is a champion of the Obama administration who finally snapped when Scalia provided the key vote delaying the president's plan to save the world by adjusting the climate.
Hillary? ha ha { the repubbers said the next prez should nominate}
 
well, I agree of course with alex that the metaphor is that the constitution and the bill of rights has been murdered, regardless. jfk was murdered and America was murdered. but I also agree with douglas dietrich America was sold out in a treaty during ww2, and with G. Edward griffin, America's money and currency was murdered in 1913. so if he was or not, America is dying

If America's currency was murdered in 1913 and was sold in WW2, isn't "America" already long dead. Nobody here was alive during the America you speak of.

I guess I'm comfortable with the tyranny I've already experienced for the first 44 years of my life.
 
If America's currency was murdered in 1913 and was sold in WW2, isn't "America" already long dead. Nobody here was alive during the America you speak of.

I guess I'm comfortable with the tyranny I've already experienced for the first 44 years of my life.
that's the problem: too many people are too comfortable. we need to be going at dc and the illuminati with pitchforks and torches. but we don't- myself included
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT