It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

LiveJournal User Turned over to Secret Service for Blog Post

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Y'know, I thought that we were a free society and that things under Bush couldn't have possibly gotten as bad as I thought it might. I'm feeling a little less optomistic after seeing a report on LiveJournal that some pro-Busher took one of her anti-Bush rants and turned it over to the FBI/Secret Service (this is confirmed by others who know the person.)

The Secret Service paid her a visit... and you can read about it here:


a word to the wise
For all my LJ-loving friends, this is a word of warning, a word to the wise, and a word of utter exhaustion after the wringer I've been put through in the last twenty-four hours.

A couple of weeks ago, following the last presidential debate, I said some rather inflammatory things about George W. Bush in a public post in my LJ, done in a satirical style. We laughed, we ranted, we all said some things. I thought it was a fairly harmless (and rather obvious) attempt at humor in the face of annoyance, and while a couple of people were offended, as is typical behavior from me, I saw something shiny and forgot about it, thinking that the whole thing was over and done and nothing else would come of what I said.

I was wrong.

At 9:45 last night, the Secret Service showed up on my mother's front door to talk to me about what I said about the President, as what I said could apparently be misconstrued as a threat to his life.

...continues...
www.livejournal.com...


I have to say that the pro-Bush person who initiated this is a REAL scumbag. I could say other unflattering and inflamatory remarks, but I won't.

I'll let her have the final say here:


HOWEVER.

I want people to be aware that what they say on their LJ can cause problems for them in RL, because I love all of you and I don't wish what happened to me on you. You are more than welcome to discuss this post in your journal, and you are more than welcome to link to it from your journal. If you want to post this in a community, go for it. Hell, if you want to put me on fandom_wank, it's probably not a bad idea. The wankers would have a FIELD DAY with this. I know I would. Please, feel free to make an example out of me. So share this with your friends. Tell them what can happen. It's beneficial to all of us to know that this can happen, and hopefully, it'll prevent something like this from happening again.




posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
how do we know for a fact that this really happened to them ?



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I think that that it has been the policy of the Secret Service to investigate ALL potential threats against the President for many, many, many years now.


What you apparently do not realize is that anything you post is a matter of public record.

You don't yell fire in a crowded theater, and you don't threaten the life of the President.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   
It is against the law to threaten the life of the president.

satire or no satire.

This has nothing to do with our free society.

I wonder what exactly she posted that was construed as a threat.

That would be the basis for a discussion.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
how do we know for a fact that this really happened to them ?


Well, it's been fairly widely discussed and investigated by the community. If you poke around in the Lj community enough, you'll see other references to it and to the original message. Although folks have felt free to express their opinions before, this is the first time (that I recall) that I've seen an ordinary citizen turned over to the FBI because someone didn't like their political attitude.

This really is beginning to sound like the communist "witch hunts" of the 1950's, when all it took was someone accusing you of being communist to get J. Edgar Hoover and his troops at your door.

[edit on 27-10-2004 by Byrd]



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Hitler's SS now revived in Bush's SS. And they say history never repeats. :shk:

Guess I'll have to change my avatar.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
Hitler's SS now revived in Bush's SS. And they say history never repeats. :shk:

Guess I'll have to change my avatar.



Uh, no. As I posted, this has always been the case (at least in the last 50 years or so).

The only difference now, is that in the age of the internet, your rants are preserved. In the old days, If you called up and said that someone had made a threat against the President, they would follow up on it. If you mailed a threatening letter, they followed up on it. The Secret Service investigates ALL threats. They always have.

This is nothing new.


The moral of the story: Show some responsibility for the statements that you make.



[edit on 27-10-2004 by HowardRoark]



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Uh, yeah. Except the threats to Kennedy and Reagan.

Edit: Removed Lincoln's name in ref to 50 years.

[edit on 2004/10/27 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Just clicked on the livejournal link to read what all the fuss was about - window says there's no data in the document. ...Lot of that going around these days.

...If you read a brief history of Hitler's takeover of Germany you will see an astounding number of similarities between him and Bush - starting with inauguration without a democratic majority, backed by corporate cash.




posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Holy crap, how do you get from the Secret Service doing what they have always done, investigating a potential threat to the president to Nazi Germany?

It is just as irresponsible to make such a threat as it is to joke about having a cannon in my pants at the airline checkpoint or to yell fire in a crowded theater.

The first Amendment does not give you the right to make threats, or incite violence.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
How to get revenge on a Pro Bush person -

Record everything they say.

Edit the recordings to say bad things about Bush.

Mail the tape to the White House identifying the person that you recorded.

Later - just say that you were a "concerned" citizen.

The more Bush people that feel the true hand of Bush ... the less there will soon be.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Without seeing her posting, kind of hard to say one way or the other on this... As Howard mentioned, ALL threats to the president are taken seriously...so if they were "put through the wringer" there must have been enough said to warrant more than just a quick interview....



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
How to get revenge on a Pro Bush person -

Record everything they say.

Edit the recordings to say bad things about Bush.

Mail the tape to the White House identifying the person that you recorded.

Later - just say that you were a "concerned" citizen.

The more Bush people that feel the true hand of Bush ... the less there will soon be.



That would be against the law and you would most likley be caught.


A more interesting question would be whether that post itself is a violation of the law.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   
You can't threaten the life of the president. It is pretty simple idea. I know most of you understand but some people insist on remaining ignorant. Incredible...........



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:03 PM
link   
I don't know any secret service types, but I did meet a security fellow once who said the biggest pain in the arse was the fact that they can't take anything as a joke now and have to investigate nearly any implied threat against thier employer, knowing 99.9999 whatever percent of all such "threats" will have been misconstrued or reported by someone with a no "humor on" switch.

It wastes so much time that could be better spent investigating likely threats, not just to the principle party, but a wider community threat - a suicide bomber targets the hi profile figure, but takes out or maims hundreds of innocents to do it

He said the problem is that Murphy's Law applies to security......the one report they don't follow up, dismiss or laugh at might be the one that bites them on the arse.

Whaddayado?


[edit on 27-10-2004 by craigandrew]



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   
All threats, no matter how benign to the utterer will be investigated, just like if say the word "bomb" in an airport. Unfortunately, the only private place these days is in your head. If you don't want things to be public knowledge, don't post it on the internet for the world to see.

The USSS has every right to interview anyone they please. No rights were violated in this instance. Everything you post is subject to public domain. In interviewing the subject, she had the right to not make statements to them, but I would suggest to anyone that finds themselves in a similar circumstance to be cooperative and move on.

An interview is not a criminal process... it is an informational gathering exercise. It is used to attempt to clarify the persons statement and assess the meaning of the statement.

Yes, you have the right to say anything in the US. It is you freedomm of speech. Just be advised that not everyone has the capacity to understand the context in which you say it. Just as another poster on here would reply to attempt to clarify a statement they might find offensive or vulgar, that is the essence of an interview from the USSS.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Hmmm...a LJ user making up a story to gain attention. That's really a far fetched idea


I would not suprised if the Secret Service did show up, because they don't fool around at all. I also would not be suprised if the blogger decided she wanted to become an internet celebrity.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Hullo. NO WHERE does it say this woman made an actual threat. In fact, the FBI told her that what she said *possibly* could be *construed* as a threat. BIG difference.

Can anybody here spell McCarthy? Hitler? Black Shirt? Nazi? ...how about SSSSSS?

There is a difference between threats, possibly construed threats and thought crimes. The difference however, is not respected by this administration. If you don't support Bush, look out.

FYI - This is NOT how a democracy works. This is how fascism works.

...and that, Howard, is how we get from the harassment of innocent people who commit thought crimes all the way to Nazi Germany. ...It shouldn't be a surprise - it's the same boys from the Bank of International Settlements still running the show, still raking it in, and still laughing all the way back to the vault in Switzerland.






posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Was she jailed? Convicted? Charged with a crime? I think not. You need to wake up and realize there is a difference in talking to someone and making blind assumptions about comparing this situation with Orwellian conspiracies.



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 08:05 PM
link   
But the Bush Administration would say,





top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join