DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Suentiend** · 02-16-2006, 10:35 PM

Ow is the fact that a man second-in-charge of the US military, shot another man in the face, and is therefore not capable of wielding a weapon, and then tried to keep it quiet, is not in the public interest? If anything, it gives greater assertion to suggestions that the Bush administration is full of cover-ups and screts.

Read the first post. Under HIPPA no information could be given out about the victim. If Cheney would have said something, you'd be all over him like flies on shit over him violating medical privacy laws. You're reaching WAY too far in trying to make this a "Gotcha".

02-16-2006, 10:35 PM	#10
Suentiend Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 516 Senior Member	Ow is the fact that a man second-in-charge of the US military, shot another man in the face, and is therefore not capable of wielding a weapon, and then tried to keep it quiet, is not in the public interest? If anything, it gives greater assertion to suggestions that the Bush administration is full of cover-ups and screts. Read the first post. Under HIPPA no information could be given out about the victim. If Cheney would have said something, you'd be all over him like flies on shit over him violating medical privacy laws. You're reaching WAY too far in trying to make this a "Gotcha".
	Quote