'Croc Hunter' feeds crocodile with baby (watch video!)

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really know
what happened.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
Judy F" wrote:

Why wouldn't he stick to his story.That's just human nature. Why would
Siegfried retract the explanation he gave when he got the result he
wanted?
Do you think he'd change the story(whether it was accurate or not) once
he
got the tiger back?

But others associated with show and the hotel said the same thing Siegfied
did.
Do you think they all got together and concocted a story to protect the
tiger?
Maybe, but I still prefer to give more credence to those who are in a
position
to know the situation most accurately than to media reports based on
audience
observations of what they *thought* happened.

It's often said that the true facts will only come out when Roy tells what
happened, but I have a suspicion that he doesn't really remember.
Especially
if, as S. surmises, the stroke occurred before the tiger took hold of him.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote:

Absotively. Given people's "shoot first, ask questions later"
attitude,
I would do the same thing if I were Siegfried and wanted to protect
the
tiger.

So why is Siegfried (and others) still sticking to the story?
Authorities
have
already investigated and released the tiger back to his owners. The
tiger
has
been safe for many months now. Sorry, that doesn't make much sense to
me.

I think that incident reminds all of us that even our cats are wild and thus
must respect that part of their nature.

--
Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs!
www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek

Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com
"Judy F" wrote in message
. net...
I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds
less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really
know
what happened.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
Judy F" wrote:

Why wouldn't he stick to his story.That's just human nature. Why would
Siegfried retract the explanation he gave when he got the result he
wanted?
Do you think he'd change the story(whether it was accurate or not) once
he
got the tiger back?

But others associated with show and the hotel said the same thing
Siegfied
did.
Do you think they all got together and concocted a story to protect the
tiger?
Maybe, but I still prefer to give more credence to those who are in a
position
to know the situation most accurately than to media reports based on
audience
observations of what they *thought* happened.

It's often said that the true facts will only come out when Roy tells
what
happened, but I have a suspicion that he doesn't really remember.
Especially
if, as S. surmises, the stroke occurred before the tiger took hold of
him.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote:

Absotively. Given people's "shoot first, ask questions later"
attitude,
I would do the same thing if I were Siegfried and wanted to protect
the
tiger.

So why is Siegfried (and others) still sticking to the story?
Authorities
have
already investigated and released the tiger back to his owners. The
tiger
has
been safe for many months now. Sorry, that doesn't make much sense to
me.

I think that incident reminds all of us that even our cats are wild and thus
must respect that part of their nature.

--
Panther TEK: Staying On Top Of All Your Computer Needs!
www.members.cox.net/catprotector/panthertek

Cat Galaxy: All Cats, All The Time!
www.catgalaxymedia.com
"Judy F" wrote in message
. net...
I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds
less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really
know
what happened.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
Judy F" wrote:

Why wouldn't he stick to his story.That's just human nature. Why would
Siegfried retract the explanation he gave when he got the result he
wanted?
Do you think he'd change the story(whether it was accurate or not) once
he
got the tiger back?

But others associated with show and the hotel said the same thing
Siegfied
did.
Do you think they all got together and concocted a story to protect the
tiger?
Maybe, but I still prefer to give more credence to those who are in a
position
to know the situation most accurately than to media reports based on
audience
observations of what they *thought* happened.

It's often said that the true facts will only come out when Roy tells
what
happened, but I have a suspicion that he doesn't really remember.
Especially
if, as S. surmises, the stroke occurred before the tiger took hold of
him.

Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote:

Absotively. Given people's "shoot first, ask questions later"
attitude,
I would do the same thing if I were Siegfried and wanted to protect
the
tiger.

So why is Siegfried (and others) still sticking to the story?
Authorities
have
already investigated and released the tiger back to his owners. The
tiger
has
been safe for many months now. Sorry, that doesn't make much sense to
me.

I think that incident reminds all of us that even our cats are wild and thus
must respect that part of their nature.

Umm. Our cats aren't wild, CP.

Sherry

I think that incident reminds all of us that even our cats are wild and thus
must respect that part of their nature.

Umm. Our cats aren't wild, CP.

Sherry

"Judy F" wrote:

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

If it's true (I mean, since we are engaging in pure speculation at this point)
that Siegfried's colleagues at the Mirage and those who worked on his show
would say that the tiger did not maul Roy when they knew that he really did,
just so that nothing bad would happen to good old Montecore, then I think they
are quite an admirable group of animal lovers, to put the tiger's welfare
beyond all else. Good for them!!!!

Of course, on the other hand, maybe the fact is that the tiger didn't attack
Roy. Which was the original point, that it has not been proven that he did.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really know
what happened.

Right. So of course, arguments based on the premise that Roy's tiger attacked
him are meaningless, since we do not know whether that is really what happened.
Glad to get that all straightened out, whew!

"Judy F" wrote:

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

If it's true (I mean, since we are engaging in pure speculation at this point)
that Siegfried's colleagues at the Mirage and those who worked on his show
would say that the tiger did not maul Roy when they knew that he really did,
just so that nothing bad would happen to good old Montecore, then I think they
are quite an admirable group of animal lovers, to put the tiger's welfare
beyond all else. Good for them!!!!

Of course, on the other hand, maybe the fact is that the tiger didn't attack
Roy. Which was the original point, that it has not been proven that he did.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really know
what happened.

Right. So of course, arguments based on the premise that Roy's tiger attacked
him are meaningless, since we do not know whether that is really what happened.
Glad to get that all straightened out, whew!

What you said!!!!!!
Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
"Judy F" wrote:

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds
less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

If it's true (I mean, since we are engaging in pure speculation at this
point)
that Siegfried's colleagues at the Mirage and those who worked on his show
would say that the tiger did not maul Roy when they knew that he really
did,
just so that nothing bad would happen to good old Montecore, then I think
they
are quite an admirable group of animal lovers, to put the tiger's welfare
beyond all else. Good for them!!!!

Of course, on the other hand, maybe the fact is that the tiger didn't
attack
Roy. Which was the original point, that it has not been proven that he
did.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really
know
what happened.

Right. So of course, arguments based on the premise that Roy's tiger
attacked
him are meaningless, since we do not know whether that is really what
happened.
Glad to get that all straightened out, whew!

What you said!!!!!!
Judy F

"Yngver" wrote in message
...
"Judy F" wrote:

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but I do think those associated with the
show and the hotel would support what Siegfried said because it sounds
less
dangerous and is a better spin for the hotel.

If it's true (I mean, since we are engaging in pure speculation at this
point)
that Siegfried's colleagues at the Mirage and those who worked on his show
would say that the tiger did not maul Roy when they knew that he really
did,
just so that nothing bad would happen to good old Montecore, then I think
they
are quite an admirable group of animal lovers, to put the tiger's welfare
beyond all else. Good for them!!!!

Of course, on the other hand, maybe the fact is that the tiger didn't
attack
Roy. Which was the original point, that it has not been proven that he
did.

I agree with you about Roy. Often people don't remember the moments right
before, during and after a terrible trauma. We'll probably never really
know
what happened.

Right. So of course, arguments based on the premise that Roy's tiger
attacked
him are meaningless, since we do not know whether that is really what
happened.
Glad to get that all straightened out, whew!