Am I missing the thread about the 14 year old girl who posted bad stuff about presdient Bush on herspace and got “questioned” by authorities?
It was on the news, aol news too. Happened in Sacramento.
I don’t know. Are you missing it? When did you have it last?
Its the last place I looked. No, really, I thought it might make for a good debate, but I don’t have the link.
The USSS takes threats against the President seriously. How would they know the poster was an apparently harmless kid until they knocked on her door?
Looks like this is what you’re talking about. What did you want to debate about it? I can see a couple of angles that merit discussion.
I, personally, have been doing my best not to listen to the news for the last week or so. What are the specifics of this story? She wrote something ‘bad’ about Bush? How bad, did it advocate violence? How was she questioned? Was she arrested?
Ahem, cite?
Is this not overreaction? They wouldn’t even let her mother be there for the interrogation. Is this not allowed as free speech? Comedians have been known ton get away with this kind of comments.
She posted a photo on her space, which she later changed. She was pulled out of her classroom, interrorgated (but not yet sent to Guantanamo).
Le sigh… preview is my friend. Thanks Miller.
Another link, shouldn’t require registration.
Nope.
No.
MySpace. The site is MySpace. You’re playing weird games with its grammar. That nitpick aside, so what? She posted an incitement to violence directed at the President. Then she was questioned.
As someone who has done quite a bit of reading, and debating, on the subject of our internment, torture, and murder of some of those we arrest in The War Against Terror, I object to your flippant invocation of Gitmo.
She incited others to take the life of George W. Bush. She was questioned. Nothing else happened. That seems to be the end of the story. Your glib jab about her possibly being sent to Gitmo in the future is either hysterical fearmongering… or glib obfuscation. It serves no honest purpose.
Sure, it’s allowed. They haven’t prevented her from saying it, or made her take it down, or (as far as I can see) threatened her in any way, although just being there no doubt intimidated the hell out of her.
I doubt that many commedians have gotten away with it, if by “getting away with it,” you mean, “weren’t questioned by the Secret Service.” The Secret Service investigates any threat to the President, no matter what. Back during the Clinton administration, they investigated Senator Jesse Helms, and Helms didn’t even make a direct threat. (His comment, IIRC, was something like, “If he ever visits a military base in Virginia, he’d better be careful.”) The rationale is, investigation isn’t a judgement call. You always check, you always make sure, because no matter how harmless the person looks, he could always be a nut whose going to act on it. “I’m going to shoot the president to impress Jodi Foster,” doesn’t sound like a plausible threat, either, but one inch to the right, and John Hinkley would have inaugerated the Bush administration eight years early. These guy’s job is protecting the single largest target on the planet. You’d be paranoid too, if that were your responsibility.
As to wether or not the girl’s parents should have been present, I’m not sure of that one. If the agents have to take seriously the idea that a fourteen year old girl might be unhinged enough to take a shot at the president, you have to consider that she might not be the only one in the household who’s off-kilter. There might be a consideration I’m overlooking, though.
Just to head off (no doubt futilely) the anti-Bush angle, this has been standing procedure for the Secret Service for a long, long time. Probably ever since McKinley was killed.
You sound like you need to calm down, sir. My comment of Guantanamo was “humor.” Obviously, you saw it not that way.
My google-fu is weak at the moment, but is it not against the law to (seriously) incite violence against the president?
Based on my limited reading it seems that if, for instance, the girl was serious in saying that Bush should be killed, then she ran afoul of the law.
And, of course, I’d say that the SS did the right thing in investigating. That’s their job, to check these sorts of things out. And despite our OP’s attitude, all that seems to have happened was that they checked the situation out.
I’m quite calm.
If this should be moved to another forum I’ll be happy to respond in greater detail and without the filters that GD necessitates.
It is not something to be “humorous” about. Especially not as a means to prop up a rather flimsy OP. You have been sparse with the details, have neglected to provide a cite, and put the word ‘questioned’ in hard quotes, suggesting some sort of sinister events transpired.
Again, I will only comment more fully on this type of behavior if this thread ends up being moved to another folder. For now, I’ll stand by my current comments about your “humor”.
Should you care to discuss the actual situation, the current laws, and protocol for the SS… then I’ll be happy to oblige on that level, too.
Probably, but I’m not sure what consitutes “seriously.” I suspect actual ability to incite is part of it. The girl might really believe that someone should kill Bush, but the ability of a fourteen year old girl to sway the masses via MySpace is probably well short of their criteria for credible (and prosecutable) threat.
That’s pretty vague. This bit:
implies that there’s a standard of intent below which the speaker has not violated the law. I can’t imagine someone ranting from a street corner being prosecuted under this, or the prosecution surviving a constitutional challenge. It think it’s geared more towards, say, cult leaders instructing their followers that god wants the president dead.
Agreed.
Ah, go easy on the newbie, Finn. At least wait 'til she subscribes before you bite her head off.
~sniffles~
I was hungry.
Ozzy?! 
You’re a bat?
More broadly, yes, there have been 14-year-old terrorists. Petit Leons, pre-teen boys with automatic rifles and little training, are fairly commonplace in several African countries. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade doesn’t have a minimum age for suicide bomber volunteers, and young teenagers–who feel exaggeratedly passionate about everything–are choice recruits. Likewise, Johnny and Luther Htoo, leaders of Myanmar’s “Army of God,” gained celebrity when they were ten. Don’t laugh off the possibility.
My main objection is that the SS decided to yank this 14 year old girl out of her classroom to question her. Could this not have been handled much better by going to her home in the evening and talking to her in front of her parents? Or were they worried that time was of the essence here?
I concur that the only thing they did wrong was to interrogate her without her parents being present (or even being notified). Even a kid has a right to some kind of counsel. Yanking her out of her classroom was overkill as well. They knew damn well there was no legitimate threat or urgency. They could have waited until she came home from school. No one would have died.