NationStates Jolt Archive

*By sending the Secret Police to intimidate a citizen over a harmless bumpersticker thats clearly an act of constitutionally protected rhetoric.This is right up there with the incident where he had a protester arrested for wearing an anti-Bush tee shirt to one of his hatefest rallies right at the point when Bush was talken about "freedom" in America.

Secret Service Question Teen Over Anti-Bush Sticker
The Salt Lake Tribune is reporting the Secret Service recently visited a 19-year-old man to question him about an anti-Bush bumpersticker on his car. The Secret Service told Derek Kjar that his neighbors had reported to the government that his car bore a bumbersticker that read "King George - Off With His Head." The agents visited Kjar at his job at a dry clearning service and asked him whether he had ties to any terrorist groups or whether he enjoyed reading historical accounts of assassinations
www.democracynow.org

seems a bit harsh... but it did say 'off with his head'

That is just silly...

*By sending the Secret Police to intimidate a citizen over a harmless bumpersticker thats clearly an act of constitutionally protected rhetoric.This is right up there with the incident where he had a protester arrested for wearing an anti-Bush tee shirt to one of his hatefest rallies right at the point when Bush was talken about "freedom" in America.

Secret Service Question Teen Over Anti-Bush Sticker
The Salt Lake Tribune is reporting the Secret Service recently visited a 19-year-old man to question him about an anti-Bush bumpersticker on his car. The Secret Service told Derek Kjar that his neighbors had reported to the government that his car bore a bumbersticker that read "King George - Off With His Head." The agents visited Kjar at his job at a dry clearning service and asked him whether he had ties to any terrorist groups or whether he enjoyed reading historical accounts of assassinations
www.democracynow.org

This has nothing to do with the President.

The Secret Service would do this to anyone - regardless of the President.

seems a bit harsh... but it did say 'off with his head'its a play on words ffs--the first part did say "king George"

This has nothing to do with the President.

The Secret Service would do this to anyone - regardless of the President.
Under no prior President have I ever seen this extreme level of overreaction against people just stating constitutionally protected political opinions

Under no prior President have I ever seen this extreme level of overreaction against people just stating constitutionally protected political opinions
Advocating the death of anyone (not just the president) in the US is not a consitutionally protected opinion. The first person I am aware of who was arrested (not just questioned) for threatening the president was a gentleman from Michigan, who said in a bar that "Someone should shoot him (Reagan)". During the Clinton years it became so oppresive that a couple was arrested for threatening the president for merely saying to the president "You suck, those boys (soldiers in Somalia) died". Time magazine did an article about the Secret Service and their presidential protection invesigations a few years ago, maybe 2000 or 2001, I suggest looking for it if you find this sort thing offensive, or perhaps it is only offensive during administrations you want to find reasons to hate.

** I cannot recall the name of the gentleman from Michigan, but the Chicago couple were the Mendozas if you care to look up thier case***

Advocating the death of anyone (not just the president) in the US is not a consitutionally protected opinion. The first person I am aware of who was arrested (not just questioned) for threatening the president was a gentleman from Michigan, who said in a bar that "Someone should shoot him (Reagan)". During the Clinton years it became so oppresive that a couple was arrested for threatening the president for merely saying to the president "You suck, those boys (soldiers in Somalia) died". Time magazine did an article about the Secret Service and their presidential protection invesigations a few years ago, maybe 2000 or 2001, I suggest looking for it if you find this sort thing offensive, or perhaps it is only offensive during administrations you want to find reasons to hate.

** I cannot recall the name of the gentleman from Michigan, but the Chicago couple were the Mendozas if you care to look up thier case***
well the secret police overreacting in those cases were just as wrong and I hope all those people were ultimately cleared of all charges--besides the bumpersticker wasnt advocating killing the President, it was a play on words and comical political rhetoric. Anyone with half a brain reading it can figure that out

well the secret police overreacting in those cases were just as wrong and I hope all those people were ultimately cleared of all charges--besides the bumpersticker wasnt advocating killing the President, it was a play on words and comical political rhetoric. Anyone with half a brain reading it can figure that out

It was a play on words specifically designed to facilitate threatening Bush's life in a commical way.

I do not think this guy meant it as a threat, merely a statement of opposition, however I aslo think that someone who wanted to kill bush would love that bumper sticker.

It was a play on words specifically designed to facilitate threatening Bush's life in a commical way.

I do not think this guy meant it as a threat, merely a statement of opposition, however I aslo think that someone who wanted to kill bush would love that bumper sticker.true--but then again they wouldnt need permission from a bumpersticker LOL

Incidentally, the words "Secret Service" and "Secret Police" are very much not interchangeable--much in the same way the words "State Troopers" and "Stormtroopers" weren't in a previous thread you put together. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=350571) Sensationalism is fun, no? ;)

Lacking any consistent method of determining which threats are real and which are not, those in a position of authority must treat every threat as a real one. That means questioning the parties involved to determine intent and credibility.

So, the Secret Service got a tip that there was a bumper sticker advocating the beheading of the president. They come in and question the boy. Indeed, the headline of the article was "Secret Service question...," insinuating that no charges were filed. It's not illegal, or even excessive, for any law-enforcement agency to conduct interviews with potential suspects.

On a somewhat more legitimate note, the "Secret Service" is the "SS". Ever notice that? :D

*By sending the Secret Police to intimidate a citizen over a harmless bumpersticker thats clearly an act of constitutionally protected rhetoric.This is right up there with the incident where he had a protester arrested for wearing an anti-Bush tee shirt to one of his hatefest rallies right at the point when Bush was talken about "freedom" in America.

Secret Service Question Teen Over Anti-Bush Sticker
The Salt Lake Tribune is reporting the Secret Service recently visited a 19-year-old man to question him about an anti-Bush bumpersticker on his car. The Secret Service told Derek Kjar that his neighbors had reported to the government that his car bore a bumbersticker that read "King George - Off With His Head." The agents visited Kjar at his job at a dry clearning service and asked him whether he had ties to any terrorist groups or whether he enjoyed reading historical accounts of assassinations
www.democracynow.org
That's great, the guy's name was Kjar and he worked in a dry cleaning business. Oh racism: Why do you have to be so wrong and so funny all at once?

What makes me even more angry about this nonsense is the nosey asshole neighbors who reported him. They probably wanted to cause unnecessary trouble just because they were personally offended by the sticker. F'ing hicks...

Lacking any consistent method of determining which threats are real and which are not, those in a position of authority must treat every threat as a real one. That means questioning the parties involved to determine intent and credibility.

So, the Secret Service got a tip that there was a bumper sticker advocating the beheading of the president. They come in and question the boy. Indeed, the headline of the article was "Secret Service question...," insinuating that no charges were filed. It's not illegal, or even excessive, for any law-enforcement agency to conduct interviews with potential suspects.

On a somewhat more legitimate note, the "Secret Service" is the "SS". Ever notice that? :D

I propose a social experiment. To test the "treat every threat as real" hypothesis I suggest MKULTRA go into his nearest international airport and nonchalantly mention to a ticket agent that "someone aught to blow up a plane in this place".

Any bets on the outcome to that?

I'm surprised no Republican ever wore a t-shirt with Clinton's name or face on it saying: Off with his "head."

People have been arrested for wearing anti-Bush shirts that weren't related to death in any way. Any President who allows his peole to continue doing that needs to be replaced. Unfortunately, in his own opinion, the actions of the people he leads does not reflect on him, and so he sees no reason to correct the actions of the people in his administration.

Next, they'll detain anyone who didn't vote Bush as a "terrorist threat".

Next, they'll detain anyone who didn't vote Bush as a "terrorist threat".

Or, more likely, they won't. But don't let me ruin your fun.

Incidentally, the words "Secret Service" and "Secret Police" are very much not interchangeable--much in the same way the words "State Troopers" and "Stormtroopers" weren't in a previous thread you put together. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=350571) Sensationalism is fun, no? ;)
I want a job in the media when I graduate

During the Clinton administration, Rush Limbaugh praised the as yet unidentified people who did a drive-by shooting of the front of 1600 Pennsylvania ave., DC., calling them "heroes and patriots".

What did the S.S. do about Rush? Nothing.

Or, more likely, they won't. But don't let me ruin your fun.

Well, it was obviously an exaggeration to reflect the rightwing mentality.

*pats you on the head*

During the Clinton administration, Rush Limbaugh praised the as yet unidentified people who did a drive-by shooting of the front of 1600 Pennsylvania ave., DC., calling them "heroes and patriots".

What did the S.S. do about Rush? Nothing.
In Rushs case it was prolly the oxycontin that was talken

This has nothing to do with the President.

The Secret Service would do this to anyone - regardless of the President.

Perhaps in the US and Russia but not in the free world. I can drive around with a sticker that replaces the name "Bush" with that of our King or P.Minister witouth a problem, just like in all democracies. Jezus, you guys are really not far from fascism.

...I thought the mods banned MKULTRA from wasting forum space with his pointless cut-and-paste spams.

Well, it was obviously an exaggeration to reflect the rightwing mentality.

Explain this "rightwing mentality."

Under no prior President have I ever seen this extreme level of overreaction against people just stating constitutionally protected political opinions

When it comes to threats against the president - real, jokes, etc. - nothing is overreacting.

It is the Secret Service's job to make people recognize that advocating or implying that you want to kill the President is a very, very serious offense, and to scare folks into not doing it.

I've heard worse than what happened to this guy, and it happened when Clinton was in office.

The President does not set the Secret Service's policy in regards to threats against him. They do. If you have a problem with this, take it up with them. He didn't order them to go after this guy. That's just what they do.

Perhaps in the US and Russia but not in the free world. I can drive around with a sticker that replaces the name "Bush" with that of our King or P.Minister witouth a problem, just like in all democracies. Jezus, you guys are really not far from fascism.

How many Prime Ministers have you had assassinated?

We've lost 4 presidents and had dozens of them attacked.

The Secret Service is determined to not have it happen again.

During the Clinton administration, Rush Limbaugh praised the as yet unidentified people who did a drive-by shooting of the front of 1600 Pennsylvania ave., DC., calling them "heroes and patriots".

What did the S.S. do about Rush? Nothing.

There was no drive by shooting. The guy had an AK-47 under his jacket, whipped it out and started firing.

I've touched one of the bullet holes that was in the fence. It's been repaired.

And even if Rush actually said it, he wasn't making a direct threat. That guys shirt could have been conceived as a threat. I know it's a stretch, but in this environment, they can't afford to let anything go.

Scenerio 1 - Kid has aforementioned bumper sticker and the Secret Service rightly performs a standard investigation. They are, after all, charged with protecting the life of the President.

Scenario 2 - Kid with aforementioned bumper sticker is never visited by the Secret Service and somehow the kid actually does cut off the head.

Why do I get the feeling that the very people blasting the Secret Service for scenario 1 would probably be the first to blast the Secret Service if, God forbid, scenario 2 occured? They'd probably go about griping and moaning about how the Secret Service failed in its duty and how incompetent it was.

Explain this "rightwing mentality."

I thought it was made evident in the original post. I'll try to explain, but first I'll need to know which particular aspects you're having trouble grasping.

How many Prime Ministers have you had assassinated?

We've lost 4 presidents and had dozens of them attacked.

quite a few. weve also had kings killed. in fact about 20 years ago someone planted a huge bomb in a hotel in a place called Brighton (its in England, you might have heard of England). it nearly killed the prime minister, and did kell a fair handful of MPs. but i can still walk round with a flag that says "Kill Blair" or "Queen Elizabeth - Off with her head" and i wouldnt be arrested. America is way more fascist than most of western europe.

There was no drive by shooting. The guy had an AK-47 under his jacket, whipped it out and started firing.

I've touched one of the bullet holes that was in the fence. It's been repaired.

And even if Rush actually said it, he wasn't making a direct threat. That guys shirt could have been conceived as a threat. I know it's a stretch, but in this environment, they can't afford to let anything go.

Different incident, one of three: the third was the plane that crashed into the White House.

Rush did say it, I was watching and listening when it was broadcast. And it was incitement to criminal activity, which is a crime, and it was directed at inciting criminal attacks against the P.o.t.U.S., which is a federal felony.

Even if the shirt can somehow be taken as a threat when Rush's treason cannot, a threat of what? Execution. Which can only legally occur after a trial. So the guy's shirt advocated bringing capital charges against someone he believes to be a criminal, and finding him guilty, and executing him. No laws broken there.

And in "this" environment? Rush said what he said after three violent attacks on the White House, if not the President himself. Clinton still jogged to McDonalds about once a week anyway. Is there actually more of a danger of presidential assassination these days?

Different incident, one of three: the third was the plane that crashed into the White House.

Rush did say it, I was watching and listening when it was broadcast. And it was incitement to criminal activity, which is a crime, and it was directed at inciting criminal attacks against the P.o.t.U.S., which is a federal felony.

Even if the shirt can somehow be taken as a threat when Rush's treason cannot, a threat of what? Execution. Which can only legally occur after a trial. So the guy's shirt advocated bringing capital charges against someone he believes to be a criminal, and finding him guilty, and executing him. No laws broken there.

And in "this" environment? Rush said what he said after three violent attacks on the White House, if not the President himself. Clinton still jogged to McDonalds about once a week anyway. Is there actually more of a danger of presidential assassination these days?And that reminds me-is Karl Rove being questioned for endangering the life of that CIA agent Valerie Plame?

I WISH TO SEE <enter name of important politician here> BEHEADED!

...


...


...


Now, who would be knockin' on my door at this time of night?

Incidentally, the words "Secret Service" and "Secret Police" are very much not interchangeableHow aren't they? Apart from in a terrorist/freedom fighter defination.

The KGB were evil oppressors who spied on their own citizens to stop freedom

The FBI are heroic law enforcement officers who spy on their own citizens to protect freedom

I thought it was made evident in the original post. I'll try to explain, but first I'll need to know which particular aspects you're having trouble grasping.

I'd like to know how a "right wing mindset" is responsible for the incident the thread is about.

And that reminds me-is Karl Rove being questioned for endangering the life of that CIA agent Valerie Plame?

Oh yeah... I'm sure Ashecroft is all over that one. :rolleyes:

This has nothing to do with the President.

The Secret Service would do this to anyone - regardless of the President.


as long as every president had Ashcroft as his Attorney general, then yes, regardless of the president.

as long as every president had Ashcroft as his Attorney general, then yes, regardless of the president.

Sorry CRACKPIE, but it doesn't matter who is president. Anything that even implies death to the head of the USA would've gotten the same scrutiny.

Oh and MKULTRA, don't let me drag my sister out of bed to beat over the head too.

Advocating the death of anyone (not just the president) in the US is not a consitutionally protected opinion.
Political expression in the form of satire (as this bumper sticker is a clear and obvious example of) is indeed one of the forms of free speech protected in the US.

I do not think this guy meant it as a threat, merely a statement of opposition, however I aslo think that someone who wanted to kill bush would love that bumper sticker.

Political satire is a legitimate form of political expression. If someone wants to kill Bush and loves something, so what? No crime commited...

Lacking any consistent method of determining which threats are real and which are not, those in a position of authority must treat every threat as a real one.
It's a bumper sticker, and get this there is no King of America, so far as I can recall of the top of my head there is no King currently alive and styled George, so I guess a bumper sticker alluding to a non-existent person is not a huge threat...

So, the Secret Service got a tip that there was a bumper sticker advocating the beheading of the president. They come in and question the boy. Indeed, the headline of the article was "Secret Service question...," insinuating that no charges were filed. It's not illegal, or even excessive, for any law-enforcement agency to conduct interviews with potential suspects.

On a somewhat more legitimate note, the "Secret Service" is the "SS". Ever notice that
Woah, that is one militaristic police state....makes a person glad to live in a society of relative freedom...all this over a bumper sticker that refers to a non-existent person, no surname, but rather the word 'King George'. You know people get stalked and cant get any protection from law enforcement because 'no crime has been commited yet'. So even when someone is following a person around, waiting outside their house, making implied threats and clearly a danger to the person they are fixated on, no action, but get a bumper sticker discussing 'offing' the head of a non-existent King and here come the secret service....piece of advice, if you ever find yourself getting stalked simply have a bumper sticker vaguely and humoursly threatening you (or a name that could be construed as you) and stick it on your stalker's car....apparently this will alert authorities to the fact that you might be in real danger.....

What makes me even more angry about this nonsense is the nosey asshole neighbors who reported him
Welcome to Bush's America where the next round of tax cuts will be funded by the dismantling of the formal police force, it wont be needed since every citizen will soon operate as police and spies, thus freeing up valuable resources to tackle the scourge of bumper sticker crimes....

I propose a social experiment. To test the "treat every threat as real" hypothesis I suggest MKULTRA go into his nearest international airport and nonchalantly mention to a ticket agent that "someone aught to blow up a plane in this place".

Any bets on the outcome to that?
Aha, despite the fact that no terrorist would be so stupid to say such a thing, despite the obviousness of the non-threat, I would expect paranoid hysterical chaos to rein..... The fact is we all are at greater risk of being murdered in a property theft crime, killed or injured in a car crash, dying of cancer, etc, than we are at risk of dying in a terrorist attack, but making Americans hysterically afraid (to the point where bumper stickers are a matter to be reported to the secret police, and you cant make a simple and obvious joke in an airport) of cars, thieves, and cancer cells, does not serve the Bush regime's current aims....

People have been arrested for wearing anti-Bush shirts that weren't related to death in any way. Any President who allows his peole to continue doing that needs to be replaced. Unfortunately, in his own opinion, the actions of the people he leads does not reflect on him, and so he sees no reason to correct the actions of the people in his administration.
Oh so true, because he doesnt care about anyone except those he believes he is the President of, and he doesnt believe he is the President of anyone except his supporters....it's time the office of President of the USA was returned to exactly that (President of the USA), rather than of 'President of whoever thinks I can do no wrong'....

Perhaps in the US and Russia but not in the free world. I can drive around with a sticker that replaces the name "Bush" with that of our King or P.Minister witouth a problem, just like in all democracies. Jezus, you guys are really not far from fascism.
As can I, indeed the right to have a humerous bumper sticker seems a pitty pilfering thing...if you cant even have a bumper sticker on your car without attracting the attention and resources of the secret police, that is very scary, although it may explain why finding actual terrorists hasnt worked out so great....what do you expect when you expend the resources that should be spent on capturing terrorists, on chasing after bumper stickers instead.....

When it comes to threats against the president - real, jokes, etc. - nothing is overreacting
What has that got to do with a satiracal bumper sticker, unless you intend to argue that Bush may have been told about the sticker while eating a preetzel....

It is the Secret Service's job to make people recognize that advocating or implying that you want to kill the President is a very, very serious offense, and to scare folks into not doing it.
Then they would do everyone a favour if they went and did their job instead of harrassing people for exercising their legitimate right to express political opinions via the traditionally acknowledged and legally protected means of satire.

I've heard worse than what happened to this guy, and it happened when Clinton was in office.
Dont worry because the true extent of the lack of freedom is actually worse than the case described.....?

The President does not set the Secret Service's policy in regards to threats against him. They do. If you have a problem with this, take it up with them. He didn't order them to go after this guy. That's just what they do.
The thing about the top job, is there is no next rung of accountability...that's what being the President is all about, being the responsible party...in case you have not noticed you cant hold the Secret Service accountable in elections, because they are not elected officials.....the secret service are not a law unto themselves, they are servents of the State, under the control of the state, which means under the control of the citizens of the state, but you cant vote for them. This concern is addressed by placing people above them (for instance the President) thus if the Secret Service are not acting as citizens desire, the President addresses this, or is the responsible party and can be voted out in favour of someone who will rein in the Secret Service.

How many Prime Ministers have you had assassinated?

We've lost 4 presidents and had dozens of them attacked.

The Secret Service is determined to not have it happen again
Are they, seems strange then that instead of directing their efforts and resources to identifying and eliminating threats to the physical safety of the President, they spend their time and resources chasing after bumper stickers...

And even if Rush actually said it, he wasn't making a direct threat. That guys shirt could have been conceived as a threat. I know it's a stretch, but in this environment, they can't afford to let anything go.
Unless a shirt is covered in acid or similar, it's not a threat, the circumstances in which a bumper sticker would present a danger are not ones I am able to imagine right now....just be careful next time you go into your wardrobe, and watch out for the killer socks next time you open a drawer....if your jacket gets out of hand, you can always call in re-enforcements, should your clothing or decorative stickers suddenly present a threat, dont take chances....call in the secret police, they will take time out from investigating real threats, to ensure that clothing and decorative stickers everywhere know there is a line they had better not cross....

Scenario 2 - Kid with aforementioned bumper sticker is never visited by the Secret Service and somehow the kid actually does cut off the head.

Why do I get the feeling that the very people blasting the Secret Service for scenario 1 would probably be the first to blast the Secret Service if, God forbid, scenario 2 occured? They'd probably go about griping and moaning about how the Secret Service failed in its duty and how incompetent it was.
If someone managed to harm the President and the only disernable 'warning' was a bumper sticker saying of with king George's head, only someone unreasonable, lacking good sense and basically living in nanoo land would dream of criticising the secret service because they didnt go chasing around after a bumper sticker....

The FBI are heroic law enforcement officers who spy on their own citizens to protect freedom
Ahh but not for much longer, due to budget cuts citizens are now being asked to spy on themselves, initially it is expected that citizens will only spy on each other, but as they realise that if they dont tell on themselves, someone else will, it is hoped that they will see the sense in saving everyone time and just reporting themselves whenever they consider planning a crime. In the meantime it is hoped that any terrorists will walk into airports and announce their intentions to blow up planes, and also that any intention to assassinate Presidents will be forecast ahead of time by way of bumper stickers...

I do think what happened was extreme, but that's what the SS does, is check out potential threats to the Pres, no matter who is the Pres at that time. I also have to agree with someone in that what really disturbs me is that a nieghbor called up the govt. I would NEVER DO THAT unless I knew the guy to be a bit crazy or something. Most people know what the context of "off with his head" is more equivilent to "to heck with him". Though I don't care for GW, it still has nothing to do with him. The SS was called on a tip, and they went to check it out and talk to the guy. That's the first thing any law-enforcement angency does. It also seems to me that the only Federal law I'm aware of that states what you CANT SAY is "to threaten the life of the President of the United States", and that supposes that its not a joke or satire. I agree that the guy should be allowed to have the sticker, but I also think that you'd be asking for more trouble than it's worth these days. I'm guessing that after the SService visited the guy, they figured he was normal enough, and then he probably took the sticker off of his car.

Still, the neighbor should be ashamed. Unless the guy was an obvious pysco, I wouldhave talked to him first, rather than making phone calls. This is the kind of thing the old communist regime fostered here in the Czech Republic, getting neighbors to snitch on each other.

ButtWeasel

Most people know what the context of "off with his head" is more equivilent to "to heck with him".
More succintly any reasonable person knows that it is not a threat in and of itself, nor indicative of one, ergo you have an unreasonable secret service (those 3 words together = very scary) or a very stupid secret service, neither is conducive to the President's well-being or the well-being and freedom of citizens.

Though I don't care for GW, it still has nothing to do with him.
Why? Isnt he an American? The freedom of citizens and effectiveness of the secret service is surely every American's concern, so why not the president.

That's the first thing any law-enforcement angency does.
No, running off to investigage a bumper sticker is not the first thing 'any law-enforcement agency' does, certainly none the agencies where I live waste thier time and resources and harrass our citizens like this.

It also seems to me that the only Federal law I'm aware of that states what you CANT SAY is "to threaten the life of the President of the United States", and that supposes that its not a joke or satire.
Laws do not suppose what is or is not a joke, they do not restrict people's freedom of speech, except where doing so is a crime due to specific laws, and there is an accepted acknowledgement that the laws that can be invoked in the case of certain forms of expression is not to be used to stifle political satire such as that expressed on the bumper sticker being discussed. The right to expression via satire is exstablished and used daily....why do you think Letterman doesnt get sued for his top 10 lists, or the MadTV show for their broadcasts? Because satire is a protected form of expression.

I agree that the guy should be allowed to have the sticker, but I also think that you'd be asking for more trouble than it's worth these days.
Translation - you agree with the principal of freedom, but actually practising it is a bit risky and should be lodged in the 'too hard' basket.....

...but at least we agree on the neighbour aspect.....talk about a way to foster closer communities....