Freedom of What?
- Thread starter Roshambo
- Start date
Sounds like something out of 24. I may be mistaken, but this isn't new in the United States, is it? Isn't it true that the so-called Bill of Rights is losing influence every year (well, except for all the gun things)?
Jarno Mikkola
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Yes!!! The Arericans have a freedom!
A freedom of words, not a freedom of speach nor freedom of press.
A freedom of words, not a freedom of speach nor freedom of press.
You know, if a student had done a similar thing with Tito's photo in former socialist Yugoslavia, the authorities would have responded in a similar fashion. For the slow among you: an obvious resemblance of Secret Service demeanor to MO of government agencies in an authoritarian police state isn't very flattering for America.
An class assignment on the right to dissent?
The irony is delicious.
Also, I wonder how 'secret' a secret service is when they operate that openly. I mean, rly. The Belgian secret service, for instance, is one of the largest of the world (with Belgium being the international HQ of so many things), yet I have yet to hear or read anything about a secret agent or a secret service operation.
... And isn't that kinda the point? Or is the American 'secret service' just another means to scare their citizens into obediance? B'cause y'know, 'secret service' sounds scary 'n all.
The irony is delicious.
Also, I wonder how 'secret' a secret service is when they operate that openly. I mean, rly. The Belgian secret service, for instance, is one of the largest of the world (with Belgium being the international HQ of so many things), yet I have yet to hear or read anything about a secret agent or a secret service operation.
... And isn't that kinda the point? Or is the American 'secret service' just another means to scare their citizens into obediance? B'cause y'know, 'secret service' sounds scary 'n all.
Jebus said:
Secret Service is just a backronym for SS.
Are you that daft?
Honestly, I prefer that the SS question the kid.
Making death threats against the president is a felony, irregardless of your views of Shrub. I prefer that the SS follow up on this instead of letting it go. In fact I'm pretty sure they are obligated by law to follow up on it if a complaint it made that can reasonably be construed as a death threat. If the kid did nothing truly illegal that will come out, and he will be stronger for the experience.
Now with that said, I only believe they were in the right becuase I respect the Secret Service's record and integrity. Hell, they are the one part of the federal gov't which I unquestioningly respect. Their job is too difficult and complicated, and their record is too clean for me to think otherwise. Evidence to the contrary will be considered, but please note that the source is important.
In the final analysis remember that for every hundred high school kids they investigate for threats to the CIC, they may find one genuine article. If that is the price we pay for the continued life of the most powerful man in the world, his hand on The Briefcase, then so be it.
Reasoned dissent?
Making death threats against the president is a felony, irregardless of your views of Shrub. I prefer that the SS follow up on this instead of letting it go. In fact I'm pretty sure they are obligated by law to follow up on it if a complaint it made that can reasonably be construed as a death threat. If the kid did nothing truly illegal that will come out, and he will be stronger for the experience.
Now with that said, I only believe they were in the right becuase I respect the Secret Service's record and integrity. Hell, they are the one part of the federal gov't which I unquestioningly respect. Their job is too difficult and complicated, and their record is too clean for me to think otherwise. Evidence to the contrary will be considered, but please note that the source is important.
In the final analysis remember that for every hundred high school kids they investigate for threats to the CIC, they may find one genuine article. If that is the price we pay for the continued life of the most powerful man in the world, his hand on The Briefcase, then so be it.
Reasoned dissent?
welsh
Junkmaster
Murdoch- I agree with you that this makes sense. Yes, it's speech, but the Secret Service has an obligation to investigate potential threats against the life of the president, which is a felony. Someone has to know whether this is a death threat or just plain speech, and short of it going to court, it's up to the Secret Service to make the investigation. If they were more rigorous, they would throw the kid in jail (provided the judge would issue the arrest warrant) and let the defense plead him out.
That said, and I have a lot of respect for the Secret Service, they are the protectors of the president, and that includes the president's secrets. They are also members of the Treasury Department, and thus responsible to the country's money supply. Those are two very interesting missions to be shared by one agency.
That said, and I have a lot of respect for the Secret Service, they are the protectors of the president, and that includes the president's secrets. They are also members of the Treasury Department, and thus responsible to the country's money supply. Those are two very interesting missions to be shared by one agency.
You have to ask, is this a death threat? I also see that the fundamental rights of minors, for having a parent or guardian present when being interrogated, was also brought into consideration. I know that is a grey area for the SS and the govt in terms of investigating treason, but uh...when was the last time a KID was tried for treason? WOW, that one boggles my mind.
Is it enough to question a kid in person, alone, 2 to 1 questioning, without any parent or guardian present, on grounds of potential treason, and then even leave it open as to whether the DA will do something about it? Damn, no wonder the kid was shaking, I would be too in his boots. For a class assignment, which the SS saw and knew about fully before they even interrogated the student? Is the next collage of Bush put into a political satire cartoon next for being considered a death threat or similar? That is what I was asking; what should be considered the line for Freedom of Speech?
They would have taken him into custody there IF there was something about it, which they would have known from talking to the school. I guess they just had to prove what kind of Freedom of Speech we really do have, and take the poster anyways.
A tack through the president's head, and a thumb's-down. Metaphoritcally, it could mean a number of things, but I think that the lack of bullet holes would be an indication and the thumbs-down a rather gentle way of saying that the president slobbers on huge donkey balls. A simple tack through the president to say that he is little more than an item that should be scrutinized for what he does, and then a thumbs-down gesture to indicate disapproval. Damn, make sure the rest of the Thumbs-Down Hitlist gets processed through Wal-Mart, quick before anyone else becomes the wiser!
Let me also guess....the student wasn't white?
And you can't burn the American flag in California, because there is a public smoking ban.
I can think of one easy, recent example, Gannongate. He was allowed into the White House without any of the proper security clearances or checks, which means that the SS failed their job to fully police and keep secure the "highest-security building in the world", in lieu of investigating/interrogating over a picture of the prez with a thumbtack through his head and a thumbs-down.
There are political cartoons and modern songwriters today say it daily even more bluntly and daringly than this poor kid ever began to say. Hell, most comedians today try to tear off Drunken Georgie's pair like a paper towel, because it isn't that hard, and he writes Jon Stewart most of the best sound clips for the show on his own.
This poster is absurd to consider a threat, George Bush Jr. Rifle Range Target Sheets would be another matter.
Is it enough to question a kid in person, alone, 2 to 1 questioning, without any parent or guardian present, on grounds of potential treason, and then even leave it open as to whether the DA will do something about it? Damn, no wonder the kid was shaking, I would be too in his boots. For a class assignment, which the SS saw and knew about fully before they even interrogated the student? Is the next collage of Bush put into a political satire cartoon next for being considered a death threat or similar? That is what I was asking; what should be considered the line for Freedom of Speech?
They would have taken him into custody there IF there was something about it, which they would have known from talking to the school. I guess they just had to prove what kind of Freedom of Speech we really do have, and take the poster anyways.
A tack through the president's head, and a thumb's-down. Metaphoritcally, it could mean a number of things, but I think that the lack of bullet holes would be an indication and the thumbs-down a rather gentle way of saying that the president slobbers on huge donkey balls. A simple tack through the president to say that he is little more than an item that should be scrutinized for what he does, and then a thumbs-down gesture to indicate disapproval. Damn, make sure the rest of the Thumbs-Down Hitlist gets processed through Wal-Mart, quick before anyone else becomes the wiser!
Let me also guess....the student wasn't white?
And you can't burn the American flag in California, because there is a public smoking ban.
Murdoch said:
I can think of one easy, recent example, Gannongate. He was allowed into the White House without any of the proper security clearances or checks, which means that the SS failed their job to fully police and keep secure the "highest-security building in the world", in lieu of investigating/interrogating over a picture of the prez with a thumbtack through his head and a thumbs-down.
There are political cartoons and modern songwriters today say it daily even more bluntly and daringly than this poor kid ever began to say. Hell, most comedians today try to tear off Drunken Georgie's pair like a paper towel, because it isn't that hard, and he writes Jon Stewart most of the best sound clips for the show on his own.
This poster is absurd to consider a threat, George Bush Jr. Rifle Range Target Sheets would be another matter.
SimpleMinded
Vault Fossil
Rosh, what I'm curious about is the tack in the forehead. From my understanding, it seems to imply the idea of a bullethole, not the idea of an item. While I agree with everything else you've said, I think the tack through the forehead was the issue, not the thumbs down.
SimpleMinded said:
Well, given the thumbs-down, the thumb's-down is the author's point of expression - it is them, their input into the picture to say something about it. The tack used was a red one, probably a common candy red one, and the forehead is a place used for emphasis, usually where you want to poke someone with a finger to get their attention - and pin them up like a bug on display (and really, where else would you tack the president's head up by? The goofy ears? You need two tacks then!)
I could believe it could be taken to mean a bullet hole when there is something to indicate a bullet hole - like a black tack to actually show a hole, and some marker blood dribbling down. You know how some teens are, some deface the hell out of their Social Studies books, and I had a secondhand one with Kennedy given the old goat devil look. If he had meant gore, he would have used it.
Roshambo said:
I plan on responding more completely to the rest of your post tomorrow Rosh, but this passage requires addressing now. Gannon was approved by the White House Press Office, and thus overruled any say the secret service had in the matter. Thus, it was not a failure on their part but rather The Rupublicans and their antics.
FYI to others: Gannon was exposed as a Republican plant in the press core, there to ask easy and leading questions to perpetuate the Republican agenda.
Various sources, in no particular order:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gannon
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0223-26.htm
http://mediamatters.org/topics/gannongate.html
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/09/white.house.reporter/index.html
Murdoch said:
No no no no no no no no NO.
It does NOT work that way. NOBODY is exempt from a background search and official security clearance channels. There is a reason why it is called the "world's highest-security building", and why the SS is supposed to keep the security. NOBODY has the right to overstep White House security, not even the Rresident; it was established this way to keep his life and wellbeing first and foremost in mind, when the SS was given that duty full time in addition to the work it used to do (Assassination of President William McKinley).
Their Protective capacity is to ensure that heads of state and others involved with govt. affairs are safe, by making an area secure and keeping it that way until the dignitary arrives. No place is that held more sacred for the SS than the White House.
NOBODY should be allowed to roam the halls of the White House, on a press pass, outside of press hours. Which the SS also similarly logged and should have been thinking on, but hey...they are apparently doing their job at watching someone with previously unverified credentials to WALK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE AT HIS LEISURE OR THAT OF OTHERS. (Pardon the pun, of course.
)I also found this interesting...
Okay, so they now claim it wasn't issued specifically by the Press Office, as you claimed, and that no security protocols were violated.
Ouch. Bad smoke and mirrors, Everett. Possible? Sorry, the logs say "repetitive".
Roshambo said:
It is?
No fucking way is that the highest security building. Anybody who has ever seen a super-max security prison would tell you.