 |
 |
||
|
|
|
 Secret Service Investigating Facebook PollPosted on Sep 29, 2009
The U.S. Secret Service investigates all threats against the life of the president, including a recent user-generated Facebook poll that asked whether the president should be killed. The social networking giant has disabled the survey, which, according to CNN, carried the possible answers “yes,” “maybe,” “if he cuts my health care” and “no.” For the record: The poll was not created by Facebook, or even the third-party developers that created the poll program that made it possible. This was strictly a user-generated fiasco. Generate your own fiasco in the comments below (just no threats, please). —PS [Thanks, Kassandra]
Advertisement Previous item: Widespread Rape, 157 Dead in Guinea 'Hell' Next item: Toyota Recalls 3.8 Million Cars Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
Refuse Allegiance to Coal
Email
Print
Share
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Propeller
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
Technorati
TwitThis
YahooMyWeb
YahooBuzz
By Fat Freddy, October 1 at 6:55 am #
archeon of thrace
Really? Why isn’t it? Read this article. It is similar, but it is not a direct threat, it is incitement. Are you as comfortable in your position with a case like this? The Libertarians are not.
http://reason.com/blog/2009/06/25/the-difference-between-they-sh
Back to the case at hand. I conceded it would be a stretch to actually prosecute, but suppose a law enforcement officer went to a judge with this Facebook poll and asked for a search warrant? Do you think the judge would be inclined to sign off on it?
Like I said, this is a case of pure stupidity. Our prisons are full of cases of stupidity. I know, I’ve been there. I find it very difficult to defend cases of stupidity that rise to this level.
And nobody said anything about “Terrorism”. I mentioned terroristic threats, but that is not “Terrorism”. You do understand the difference, right?
Report thisBy Laugher, September 30 at 11:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Its sad that the secret service would waste their time on such frivolous matters. Hopefully they will keep their eye more on the ball in the future
There are real threats out there to the first black president. This clearly was not one of them
If I had participated in the poll and the secret service contacted me, I would not co-operate, and demand they come back with a warrent
Report thisBy CWB56, September 30 at 11:02 pm #
Thank you inherit the wind for a point well made. I
Report thistoo felt that Bush was by far the worst president we
ever had and couldn’t believe that he got elected once
let alone twice. But unlike so many conservatives
today, I never hoped that he would fail - I hoped he would
surprise me and succeed though that never happened. I
never would have wanted him killed either for the exact
reasons you state. So my point is that in spite of so
many conservatives giving a lot of lip service to the
flag, constitution, bible, democracy and freedom, their behavior toward Obama demonstrates that they
don’t know the first thing about any of them.
By Inherit The Wind, September 30 at 10:08 pm #
Yes, Kim. It’s wrong and illegal to threaten or even hint at threatening the life of the President. It’s not the man/woman you are attacking, but the office and the concept of our nation.
You get legally get rid of presidents by:
a) Voting them out of office
b) Waiting till their 2nd term expires
c) Convicting them in an impeachment trial
d) Convincing them to resign
e) Using Amendment 25, Section 4 to take power away from an incapacitated President—he’s still President, but in name only.
That’s how you get rid of a President you don’t like. You don’t usurp the right of People and the mechanisms of the Law by murder.
Kim, you can call Obama any filthy name that you like, that gets you hot. But no, you cannot threaten his life.
As someone who detested George Bush as the WORST President we ever had, I ONLY advocated legal means for getting him out of the White House.
Report thisBy archeon of thrace, September 30 at 7:18 pm #
Fat Freddy, you are wrong.
It is not a threat.
It is not terrorism.
It is not a clear and present danger.
The mere posing of a question is not illegal.
Those who responded with “yes”, and who are”
1 - capable of carrying out a threat to kill the
pres.
2 - engaged in active terrorism.
3 - involved in violence promoting activities.
Should already be known to the:
NSA
Report thisFBI
CIA
other law enforcement and intellegence services.
By CWB56, September 30 at 7:01 pm #
You conservatives are crazy to think that progressives acted toward Bush the way conservatives are acting toward Obama.
Did any member of Congress scream “you lie” when Bush was giving a speech even though Bush did lie?
Did anyone ever attend Bush speaking engagements with fire arms?
Did anyone ever hope Bush failed?
The reality is that progressives never acted as poorly toward Bush as conservatives are acting toward Obama. In addition, what we said about Bush was true whereas everything conservatives are saying about Obama is a lie.
The ignorance of many conservatives is a danger to our country. Please just go stand on the hill and wait for the apocalypse while the rest of us try to move our counry forward again after your conservative policies have almost destroyed our country.
Report thisBy Fat Freddy, September 30 at 6:03 pm #
edensasp
Perhaps not the person who posted the poll, but the ones who answered “yes” [the President should be killed], could be considered clear and present danger etc. It’s a stretch, but…it would be irresponsible for the the Secret Service to not investigate.
it was ok to Burn effigies of Bush… and call him hitler
Yeah, well, that’s certainly the same as proclaiming The President should be killed for all the millions of people to see on Facebook. Again, I am speaking about the people who voted “yes” to the poll. By voting “yes”, one is proclaiming “the President should be killed”. Anybody stupid enough to do that deserves to be locked up for his own good. (Kidding.) But brain dead people do brain dead things, which seems to be a fairly large part of the Republican supporters.
Perhaps these people would be more qualified to rule on this:
http://www.aryan-nations.org/index-2.htm
We have a long rich history of swinging black folk from trees in this country. It hasn’t happened lately, but the sentiment is alive and well. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
Report thisYeah, I played the “race card”.
By Rodger Lemonde, September 30 at 4:53 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
bojan1
Report thisBush and Cheney were cowards that enjoyed lying to the
American people. They have the blood of thousands on
their hands.
Their reaction to this would have been to render the
guy to some unknown location and torture him.
After that it will be decades before the Republican
MINORITY can regain power, if they survive.
By Kim, September 30 at 11:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
so- it was ok to Burn effigies of Bush… and call him hitler, which he may or may not have been likened to fairly or not; but it was “ok” for the libs to call him liar, burn effigies and conduct in gross misconduct. But, when people simply talk about an opinion poll… and answer it, even if it is absurd… well all the “fair minded Libs” get their panties in a wad…and want to call out the cops…. LMOA…. you are the bunch of hypocrites and fascists and self decieved liars! talk about commi’s omg!
Report thisBy edensasp, September 30 at 8:57 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
(Having not read the actual poll & being an active proponent of the Obama administration.)
Really, you believe that…
Imminent lawless action can legally be defined as “Should the President be killed” question?
I would agree if the poll was actually a call to assassinate the president where an imminent ability to do so was present, (Like encouraging or instigating a riot)...In its current format as presented by this article it is no more than a pepsi vs coke inquiry.
Again, A terroristic threat is a crime generally involving a threat to commit violence communicated with the intent to terrorize another, to cause evacuation of a building, or to cause serious public inconvenience. This poll is an inquiry, not a call to arm and assassinate or a threat to do the same. No is the question a direct threat to the president. This poll doesn’t meet that criteria either.
As for “Clear & present danger” The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. Again this poll does not mitigate that criteria either, it is not a threat of assassination or a call to assassinate, this poll, is a mere inquiry of opinions on the subject of “Should the president be killed”.
However, if in the polling section were a comment section by poll participants and adverse comments supporting the actions so described in the above referenced legal findings were to be discovered, those who posted the answers in response to the inquiry are in the act of criminal culpability. The mere posturing of a question is not restricted by law but is in fact protected speech. The responses to that question may or may not be the offending matter.
The violation of “Terms of Use” on the other hand are civil matters of contract breech between the person who posted the poll and the corporate sponsor who “owns and operates” the website, in this instance, “Facebook”. Freedom of speech is not constitutionally protected in any matter between two private parties who contract in a commercial agreement such as the term of use published on “Facebook” where “Facebook” maintains the exclusive right to determine what constitutes offensive material and the removal there-of. The question posed is not unlawful, the poster who posted the poll right of free speech was not infringed upon by the government, “Facebook” did not act in violation of it’s contract with the poster. However…The poll participants may have violated the laws in their responses to its inquiry. If i was the USSS, I too would investigate the responders too.
So when is inquiry illegal?
Report thisBy Fat Freddy, September 30 at 5:30 am #
archeon of thrace,
Yes, it’s illegal. Ever hear of Terroristic Threats? Clear and present danger? Imminent lawless action?
Legal definitions here:
http://definitions.uslegal.com/t/terroristic-threat/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_and_present_danger
Christ, even Nat Hentoff would agree.
—————————————————————————
So, what were the results? Need I ask?
Perhaps the wording should be changed.
Should
President Obamapeople with IQs less than 60, live in trailer parks, and use a Confederate flag as a window treatment…FIFY
Report thisBy CWB56, September 30 at 12:08 am #
We are supposed to be living in a democracy and
Report thisPresident Obama was elected into office by the majority
of the people. The right wing ignorant rednecks appear
to have forgotten this and need to be reminded by
throwing some of their derrieres in prison for
threatening our President. Bringing the fascist thugs
under control is long overdue.
By archeon of thrace, September 29 at 10:42 pm #
so this is illegal?...........an we don’t live in the
USSA (the United Soviet States of America), PRUSA
(Peoples Republic of the United States of America.
Oh well reactionaries live on!
Report this