Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Secret Service Investigating Facebook Poll Asking Whether Obama Should Be Killed

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   
So its now illegal to hate Obama, protest against him, make a humorous "joker" banner about him, disagree with him in congress, interview him unless you submit your questions prior, even make a poll which not even 1% of the American population would even read anyway, yet he still claims America has "free speech". He's not a President, he's a Dictator.




posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
As much as I dislike Obama, I am a pacifist and he is a fellow human being. I would be outraged if he was killed.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Awesome. I hope the morons who put the poll up and those who voted on it get some sort of a smack down (not for voicing their opinions) but for doing it in an incredibly stupid way. I'm all for free speech, this is true, but there are consequences associated with it (positive or negative) and one should expect that, as well.


I think you should be punished for calling for someone to be punished for breaking no laws.

How does that work for you?

See? We all have our opinions.. we all have our song and dance to perform.

PS- I don't actually think you should be punished. I was just trying to make a point that these people broke no laws, yet you guys are all calling for them to be physically punished.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I didn't say punished.

I said there will be consequences for one's actions. Whether those consequences are positive or negative, depends on the actions.

Just as it IS in fact illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, there are aspects that do not apply to "free speech".

I did not say that the poll should be illegal, either. I also did not imply that it should not be an option. I did imply that if you are going to threaten the president (or imply it, or potentially incite others to do so) to expect some sort of consequence. What that consequence is, is not up to me and I made no reference to what I thought it should be. I should have put "smackdown" in quotes...


[edit on 28-9-2009 by LadySkadi]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


Why should their be consequences for discussing a topic with your peers?

Are we still in America?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ninecrimes
 


The opinion poll on face book however is not a debate about policy it is blind hatred that brings on discussion of assassination. If disagreement and even anger birth the idea of killing someone I'd say we have a problem.

How could Obama so affect someones life in a negative way that it justifies murder? This kind of talk has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with Who our president is.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Yep, we are still in America...

If you want to discuss "killing" the President, expect it to be addressed. It would be the same thing if "someone" (quoted because I don't know who that someone/agency would be) picked up the key words in a cell phone conversation or online or any other type of form. This is not new.

Now, if peers want to discuss "killing" or whether the Pres. should be "killed" amongst themselves, off the grid where those "key words" aren't going to raise some flags, by all means go for it. However, if one chooses to do so in a very public, world wide format, expect it to draw some attention from some agency somewhere that will take it seriously.

Again, I never said "don't do it" go for it, if ya want, just expect someone, somewhere to notice and with notice comes some type of "consequence" (yes, again with that word)... whether that consequence is simply scrutiny or something more, who's to know?


Originally posted by ninecrimes
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


Why should their be consequences for discussing a topic with your peers?

Are we still in America?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
I should also make it clear, once more, that I do NOT agree with this poll or it's message. I would NOT participate in it- and if I did, I would have voted "No".

However, I would literally die to protect the creator of the poll, as I believe it is his/her right to ask other people if they feel like he/she does. Once we lose our absolutely freedom to speak our minds- we will have lost it all.

If the poll was "How should I kill him", then I can see why people consider it a direct threat. But the poll was "Should he be killed", which does NOT imply any action pending the results of the poll.

I love debating these types of "gray areas". I just hope no one thinks I am defending the crazy guy who made the poll... instead, I am defending his right to ask anything he wants, to anyone he wants.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Yep, we are still in America...

If you want to discuss "killing" the President, expect it to be addressed. It would be the same thing if "someone" (quoted because I don't know who that someone/agency would be) picked up the key words in a cell phone conversation or online or any other type of form. This is not new.

Now, if peers want to discuss "killing" or whether the Pres. should be "killed" amongst themselves, off the grid where those "key words" aren't going to raise some flags, by all means go for it. However, if one chooses to do so in a very public, world wide format, expect it to draw some attention from some agency somewhere that will take it seriously.

Again, I never said "don't do it" go for it, if ya want, just expect someone, somewhere to notice and with notice comes some type of "consequence" (yes, again with that word)... whether that consequence is simply scrutiny or something more, who's to know?


Originally posted by ninecrimes
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


Why should their be consequences for discussing a topic with your peers?

Are we still in America?


Woah, woah now!!

Please do not put words in anyone's mouth.

No one was discussing killing anyone.

The poll was "should he be assassinated".

It was NOT "how should we kill him" or "where should we bury his corpse".

[edit on 28-9-2009 by ninecrimes]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


The people that posted it should seriously be prosecuted to the full extent of our laws. Granted, they may not be from the good ole U.S. of A. But that is crossing the line. No matter if you dislike our current president or not. It's just as bad as the documentary where Bush Jr. got assassinated.

What is in that poll is NOT freedom of speech. Sorry. It's a sick question that crosses the line. And yes, there are those loose cannons out there that may take the results seriously enough and act on what they may feel is the stance of the majority of this nation. Which would be wrong. No American should ever want any president assassinated. Period.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
ninecrimes

Perhaps it's semantics... but to me "assassinating" and "killing" are one in the same. Granted, I did not see the poll. By "you" I didn't mean you, I meant the general "you" I should have used "one" I suppose. Not pointing fingers at ya. Sorry for that miss-communication.



[edit on 28-9-2009 by LadySkadi]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by double_frick
 


That doesn't seem like a harmless quiz to me. Sounds more like one that files you in a database depending on your answers lol which maybe be the objective of the people involved in facebook now.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


and if the same question was posed about the leader of Iran?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg
reply to post by grover
 


The people that posted it should seriously be prosecuted to the full extent of our laws. Granted, they may not be from the good ole U.S. of A. But that is crossing the line. No matter if you dislike our current president or not. It's just as bad as the documentary where Bush Jr. got assassinated.

What is in that poll is NOT freedom of speech. Sorry. It's a sick question that crosses the line. And yes, there are those loose cannons out there that may take the results seriously enough and act on what they may feel is the stance of the majority of this nation. Which would be wrong. No American should ever want any president assassinated. Period.


Actually, it IS covered by our freedom of speech.

There was no discussion of killing anyone. It was a poll asking if people thought he should be.

So, are you saying our freedom of speech doesn't matter, and we should just arrest people because they're "pushing the envelope"?

As for the "loose cannon who will take it too seriously": wouldn't the loose cannon be the punishable one?

You, sir, seem sick in the head to me. You are calling for the punishment of people who have not broken any laws.

I think maybe you are the one who should be arrested, for being an opponent to our most valued freedoms.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
To be honest, the main thing that I find wrong with this poll is that the idea is even thought about by people posting their views online. Not that they shouldn't have the right to post it, but that it even comes up at all.

It is a sad day when people think about killing their leaders, and let me remind you that this isn't the first time it has been mentioned. The same question has been asked about Bush as well.

The fact that the people are so discontented that the question of "assassination" of their leaders is troubling to say the least. It shows that that the people feel they have no control over their leaders actions and look to violence as a last resort.

I ask you this, if the world economy was stable, there was adequate healthcare and the future looked brighter, would people still be posing questions like this?

Maybe that should be a poll instead.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by threekings
reply to post by dariousg
 


and if the same question was posed about the leader of Iran?


What if it was about you, or me?

No one has threatened anyone with anything.

The poll was "do you think he should be killed".

Is that an illegal question to ask?

If so, is it also illegal to quote the question?


Seriously, guys.. you are all starting to sound like disinfo agents, to me.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ninecrimes
 


I'm sorry, but I think the 'freedom of speech' line was crossed in the wording of this poll. When you ask if he should be assassinated it is a LOT different than asking if you think he will be. Period.

Yes, the question of whether he could be assassinated is a gray area topic but the one posed in the poll is black and white.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by dariousg]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg
reply to post by ninecrimes
 


I'm sorry, but I think the 'freedom of speech' line was crossed in the wording of this poll. When you ask if he should be assassinated it is a LOT different than asking if you think he will be. Period.

Yes, the question of whether he could be assassinated is a gray area topic but the one posed in the poll is black and white.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by dariousg]


No- the poll was "should he be assassinated".

That is not an illegal question to ask.

An illegal question would be "which weapon should I use".

Get your facts straight before you start calling for the prosecution of your fellow citizens.

Do you really value your rights so little, as to deny them to someone because you disagree with what they have to say?

You are very wrong, and I'm deeply offended by your total lack of caring for the freedoms our grandfathers and their grandfathers before them fought so valiantly for.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
No one is questioning whether it is covered by free speech...of course it is...rather is it appropriate...

And no it is not by any stretch of the imagination.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
There is a line to free speach. We have all heard this before, but it is true: you can not walk into a crowded theater and yell "fire" when there is no fire. There are reasons for this. You could cause unecessary harm to others, as people freak out and trample each other trying to get out.

You can hate the president and say: I hate the president. But you can not by law, talk about assinating him. It is law.



www.lectlaw.com...
THREATS AGAINST PRESIDENT - 18 USC 871, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to willfully make a true threat to injure or kill the President of the United States.

A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: That the person uttered words alleged to be the threat against the President;

Second: That the person understood and meant the words he used as a true threat; and

Third: That the person uttered the words knowingly and willfully.

A "threat" is a statement expressing an intention to kill or injure the President; and a "true threat" means a serious threat as distinguished from words used as mere political argument, idle or careless talk, or something said in a joking manner.

The essence of the offense is the knowing and willful making of a true threat. So, if it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the person knowingly made a true threat against the President, willfully intending that it be understood by others as a serious threat, then the offense is complete; it is not necessary to prove that the person actually intended to carry out the threat.


If one can not see the danger in allowing people to make polls and talk about assignating the president, then, there is no hope.

The poll said: Should Obama be killed.
We do not know this person, but he could be some wacked out person who is looking for an excuse to do it. This is not something to play around with. There have been assinations and attemps before.

Screen shot here: thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com...

[edit on September 28th 2009 by greeneyedleo]





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join