The Maverick Conservative

See the previous FOUR entries in this blog under the heading of "Tiger, Tiger, Burning Bright."

Today's AP/AOL story is that this whole thing could be a costly, even fatal, "blow" to the San Francisco Zoo. That is because today's news is that the tiger probably did jump out on its own (despite zoo misinformation and media/"expert" SPECULATION), and information that any "taunting" by the victims was probably not as blatant as the media had been reporting.  See a later entry (this is the first in a series) as to the amazing FACTUAL details that have come out (factual details that the San Francisco Chronicle and the rest of teh media FAILED to discover, in journalistic MALPRACTICE, because they were too interested in SPECULATION based on "anonymous sources" and few facts).

What about the despicable San Francisco Chronicle (albeit not really much more despicalbe than the despicalbe Asdsociated Press, AOL News, Fox News, and all of the rest relying on SPECULATION instead of "news')?

Should the San Francisco Chronicle DIE? Should even the injured young men sue for LIBEL? My answer to the first question is a resounding YES (I have said long ago that the despicable AP and AOL should DIE).

See my BEFORE THE FACT entries in this blog over the past few days (the four entries most under the heading "Tiger, Tiger, Burning Bright"), aoubt this SPECULATION about "taunting" by "dangling a leg" over the barrier.  In fact, my very first entry expressed the hope that the media would refrain from this evil SPECULATION (do I know these people or what?). This was based on the usual "anonymous sources" and total SPECULATION.

You should NEVER believe a story based on anonymous sources. Oh, heck, you should never believe the mainstream medai at all. The police, of course, held a news conference and stated that there was NO "shoe" found in the enclousre, or evidence that the dead or injured "dangled" a leg.

Stay tuned for multiple further entries.

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this