If I don't post here for while...
carrrnuttt
06-29-2004, 03:29 PM
...it means that I got grabbed too.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5318070/
I live about 20 mins away from where this man lives.
Whatever he was saying, bad as it sounded, he was posting it on the internet, supposedly the last bastion of free-speech on this planet.
They haven't posted any proof of a plot, real or imagined, just the man talking about what he felt Bush deserved.
Anywho, later...I need to start writing my will...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5318070/
I live about 20 mins away from where this man lives.
Whatever he was saying, bad as it sounded, he was posting it on the internet, supposedly the last bastion of free-speech on this planet.
They haven't posted any proof of a plot, real or imagined, just the man talking about what he felt Bush deserved.
Anywho, later...I need to start writing my will...
twospirits
06-29-2004, 03:42 PM
Well i guess alot of folks would be rounded up .
Not to get off track here, but isn't there an attemp on every president that is in office the year that is divisible by 20. I thought I read that somewhere. The next one is suppose to be Bush. Then again it may not happen cause the curse could be broken, since Ronald Regan survived his assassination attemp.
Still the CNN report makes one wonder if Big Brother is watching.
Not to get off track here, but isn't there an attemp on every president that is in office the year that is divisible by 20. I thought I read that somewhere. The next one is suppose to be Bush. Then again it may not happen cause the curse could be broken, since Ronald Regan survived his assassination attemp.
Still the CNN report makes one wonder if Big Brother is watching.
91300zxtt
06-29-2004, 04:40 PM
no its a president dies every 20 years while in office, ronald regan almost died, and i hear he actually died a few times while being operated on. and then you have bush, i guess you could consider him choking on the pretzel as a near death
taranaki
06-29-2004, 05:24 PM
Hooray for the Patriot Act!
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
If the guy needs psychiatric help,then so be it.But as far as I'm concerned,it's the people who want to vote for Bush rather than kill him who need it more.
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
If the guy needs psychiatric help,then so be it.But as far as I'm concerned,it's the people who want to vote for Bush rather than kill him who need it more.
Flatrater
06-29-2004, 06:37 PM
Hooray for the Patriot Act!
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
If the guy needs psychiatric help,then so be it.But as far as I'm concerned,it's the people who want to vote for Bush rather than kill him who need it more.
I have to disagree with you Naki. if that guy did the same thing before the Patriot Act he would of still got aressted, so don't blame the Patriot Act and Bush on this one!
With free speech there are limits that you don't cross! It's free speech to yell fire in a movie theather (especailly Michael Moore's movies) but don't hand around because you will end up in jail. Same goes fro making threats of violence.
Do we have any proof that he didn't threaten the president which is against the law both pre and post the Patriot Act? Every president in America has been given the same takl by some angry people, Nixon,Ford, Carter, Reagan, and so on so don't throw up BUsh and the Patriot act as the cause.
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
If the guy needs psychiatric help,then so be it.But as far as I'm concerned,it's the people who want to vote for Bush rather than kill him who need it more.
I have to disagree with you Naki. if that guy did the same thing before the Patriot Act he would of still got aressted, so don't blame the Patriot Act and Bush on this one!
With free speech there are limits that you don't cross! It's free speech to yell fire in a movie theather (especailly Michael Moore's movies) but don't hand around because you will end up in jail. Same goes fro making threats of violence.
Do we have any proof that he didn't threaten the president which is against the law both pre and post the Patriot Act? Every president in America has been given the same takl by some angry people, Nixon,Ford, Carter, Reagan, and so on so don't throw up BUsh and the Patriot act as the cause.
YogsVR4
06-29-2004, 06:46 PM
Did people miss this?
Walsh reached for a semiautomatic pistol in a shoulder holster and was yelling, "Go ahead and please kill me" and "kill me, kill me," reports stated.
Patriot act? What did that have to do with this? Some of you people :disappoin
I guess there is no chance that someone could actually be guilty of any crime as long as it was directed at President Bush. Nope - if he had threatened to harm the local principle and nobody did anything you'd all be raising holy hell that the police stood by. The secret service did its job. Now the courts will do theirs. Its the way the system should and does work.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Walsh reached for a semiautomatic pistol in a shoulder holster and was yelling, "Go ahead and please kill me" and "kill me, kill me," reports stated.
Patriot act? What did that have to do with this? Some of you people :disappoin
I guess there is no chance that someone could actually be guilty of any crime as long as it was directed at President Bush. Nope - if he had threatened to harm the local principle and nobody did anything you'd all be raising holy hell that the police stood by. The secret service did its job. Now the courts will do theirs. Its the way the system should and does work.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
2strokebloke
06-29-2004, 06:48 PM
Yes it's pretty stupid for anybody to go around saying they wish somebody would be killed, especially if you're talking about the president - you know somebody is going to hear it and over react, that's logical.
The guy obviously over-rated the government when they came to arrest them, since while he feared that they'd abuse his rights (and perhaps understandably so, unless he had heard about the supreme court ruling in favour of justice, and not stupidity).
The guy obviously over-rated the government when they came to arrest them, since while he feared that they'd abuse his rights (and perhaps understandably so, unless he had heard about the supreme court ruling in favour of justice, and not stupidity).
carrrnuttt
06-29-2004, 06:59 PM
Did people miss this?
No, I did not miss that.
Whatever stupidity he did while being accosted was his own - nobody else to blame.
But did you think about the fact that they even accosted him at all? I mean, they should at least give some more evidence, than the fact that he supported the Iraqi resistance, and talked about what Bush deserves online, - especially in an election year - you think? I mean, what was he going to do? Commit a virtual assasination?
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.
I thought you were Libertarian?
No, I did not miss that.
Whatever stupidity he did while being accosted was his own - nobody else to blame.
But did you think about the fact that they even accosted him at all? I mean, they should at least give some more evidence, than the fact that he supported the Iraqi resistance, and talked about what Bush deserves online, - especially in an election year - you think? I mean, what was he going to do? Commit a virtual assasination?
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.
I thought you were Libertarian?
Flatrater
06-29-2004, 07:39 PM
[QUOTE=carrrnuttt]
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.QUOTE]
To get arrested for this doesn't require a plot just a threat.
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.QUOTE]
To get arrested for this doesn't require a plot just a threat.
YogsVR4
06-29-2004, 07:54 PM
I'm saying that there was a threat - to what degree we don't know. Either the courts will throw out the charges or it will proceed. Thats what I'm waiting on. I cannot say that he made only made vague threats anymore then anyone else here can. Proof of a crime is not required to make an arrest. Proof of a crime is required to convict someone.
People can say and do whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights or well being of others. This includes everyone - even the president.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
People can say and do whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights or well being of others. This includes everyone - even the president.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
taranaki
06-29-2004, 08:02 PM
Did people miss this?
Not at all. The guy was responding in an excessive manner to an excessive event.Report a crime to the police,and they'll most likely shrug,issue you with the paperwork for your insurance claim,and go back to eating their donuts.
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
Not at all. The guy was responding in an excessive manner to an excessive event.Report a crime to the police,and they'll most likely shrug,issue you with the paperwork for your insurance claim,and go back to eating their donuts.
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
YogsVR4
06-29-2004, 09:00 PM
Not at all. The guy was responding in an excessive manner to an excessive event.Report a crime to the police,and they'll most likely shrug,issue you with the paperwork for your insurance claim,and go back to eating their donuts.
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
And there's the problem.
The man made no threats of violence against Bush.
Though the article said Secret Service agent who said the man threatened the life of President Bush
Now I don't know if he did or didn't and nobody else here does either. However, a lot of people are jumping to a conclusion because of their bias against the president. There are hundreds of blogs and posts on the web about people hatred for Bush. One guy gets arrested and its the slippery slope to ghestopo tactics :rolleyes: Amazing :disappoin
Edit: I forgot to mention that the administration can't order the Secret Service to do anything. They work for the Congress.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
And there's the problem.
The man made no threats of violence against Bush.
Though the article said Secret Service agent who said the man threatened the life of President Bush
Now I don't know if he did or didn't and nobody else here does either. However, a lot of people are jumping to a conclusion because of their bias against the president. There are hundreds of blogs and posts on the web about people hatred for Bush. One guy gets arrested and its the slippery slope to ghestopo tactics :rolleyes: Amazing :disappoin
Edit: I forgot to mention that the administration can't order the Secret Service to do anything. They work for the Congress.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
taranaki
06-30-2004, 01:38 AM
"I said Bush was terrible and deserved to be killed, but I never said I would do it," Walsh said.
There was no other information about the threat in police records.
He said that he didn't. Nowhere in police records does it say that he did.I'm assuming that the police are actually competent at recording evidence in that part of the world,and a complete absence of such an important piece of evidence is sufficient for me to conclude that it never happened.Your spook is too dim to understand the subtle nuance between wishing for something and intending to make it happen.
There was no other information about the threat in police records.
He said that he didn't. Nowhere in police records does it say that he did.I'm assuming that the police are actually competent at recording evidence in that part of the world,and a complete absence of such an important piece of evidence is sufficient for me to conclude that it never happened.Your spook is too dim to understand the subtle nuance between wishing for something and intending to make it happen.
DGB454
06-30-2004, 05:46 AM
The man carried a semi-automatic weapon around and was going to kill himself and was yelling kill me , kill me....
I would say he was long overdue for psychiatric care.
I would say he was long overdue for psychiatric care.
YogsVR4
06-30-2004, 08:08 AM
There was no other information about the threat in police records.
Lack of information found by the reporter in police records does not mean the investigation was completed nor does it mean that he didn't do it. The requirements to make an arrest are different from those to make a conviction. Nobody has to be convicted of anything before being arrested. The judge will throw the course out if the DA cannot show sufficient reason to continue to trial.
This whole thread was an excuse to rag on the Bush administration when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Lack of information found by the reporter in police records does not mean the investigation was completed nor does it mean that he didn't do it. The requirements to make an arrest are different from those to make a conviction. Nobody has to be convicted of anything before being arrested. The judge will throw the course out if the DA cannot show sufficient reason to continue to trial.
This whole thread was an excuse to rag on the Bush administration when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
carrrnuttt
06-30-2004, 10:43 AM
This whole thread was an excuse to rag on the Bush administration when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/eek7.gif
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/eek7.gif
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
Pick
06-30-2004, 11:05 AM
.
This whole thread was an excuse to rag on the Bush administration when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Welcome to the modern AF political forums. 95% of the threada started here are made to chastise Bush, and if that isn't their original intent, it becomes the subject real soon.
This whole thread was an excuse to rag on the Bush administration when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Welcome to the modern AF political forums. 95% of the threada started here are made to chastise Bush, and if that isn't their original intent, it becomes the subject real soon.
carrrnuttt
06-30-2004, 11:46 AM
Welcome to the modern AF political forums. 95% of the threada started here are made to chastise Bush, and if that isn't their original intent, it becomes the subject real soon.
Stay out of this kid. You're out of your league, mentally, emotionally, and politically, as evidenced by another one of your thoughtless replies that either have no bearing, or provide no additional thoughts on the thread, whatsoever. http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/disappointed.gif
Stay out of this kid. You're out of your league, mentally, emotionally, and politically, as evidenced by another one of your thoughtless replies that either have no bearing, or provide no additional thoughts on the thread, whatsoever. http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/disappointed.gif
Pick
06-30-2004, 11:58 AM
Stay out of this kid. You're out of your league, mentally, emotionally, and politically, as evidenced by another one of your thoughtless replies that either have no bearing, or provide no additional thoughts on the thread, whatsoever. http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/disappointed.gif
HAHAHA....whatever...you're not even worth replying. :thefinger
And I'm REALLY beginning to dislike you. So cool it with the personal attacks.
HAHAHA....whatever...you're not even worth replying. :thefinger
And I'm REALLY beginning to dislike you. So cool it with the personal attacks.
DGB454
06-30-2004, 12:30 PM
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/eek7.gif
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
I can't comment on what Yogs will say or even answer for him so I won't. What I will say is "The man carried a semi-automatic weapon around and was going to kill himself and was yelling kill me , kill me....
I would say he was long overdue for psychiatric care." (or at the very least evaluation). The way I understand it from the story he is getting just that. If I had a neighbor carrying around a semi automatic weapon in a holster you can bet I would call the cops to (at the very least) investigate him. Wouldn't you wouldn't do the same?
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
I can't comment on what Yogs will say or even answer for him so I won't. What I will say is "The man carried a semi-automatic weapon around and was going to kill himself and was yelling kill me , kill me....
I would say he was long overdue for psychiatric care." (or at the very least evaluation). The way I understand it from the story he is getting just that. If I had a neighbor carrying around a semi automatic weapon in a holster you can bet I would call the cops to (at the very least) investigate him. Wouldn't you wouldn't do the same?
91300zxtt
06-30-2004, 12:35 PM
its a conspiracy, he might have known something. you cant be 100%sure he ever did that, just as you cant be 100% sure he didnt. its one person over anothers.
and PICK, CAR was right, you seem not to really be contributing anything other than saying something negative about the forum, maybe it is out of your league man:dunno:
and PICK, CAR was right, you seem not to really be contributing anything other than saying something negative about the forum, maybe it is out of your league man:dunno:
YogsVR4
06-30-2004, 06:25 PM
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/eek7.gif
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
This has nothing to do with canidate loyalty. Anyone who is threatened by someone else should be investigated and if it meets the requirements for an arrest, then one should be made.
It scares me that because some are so blinded by their hatred for Bush that they are using this as a reason to bash him. What part did he or his administration play? The secret service reports to congress - not the executive branch. This isn't a rationalization, its the facts.
Consider all the blogs and threads on the web that bad mouth or call for the death of Bush and now there is ONE guy who's been arrested because he made a threat and owns (legally or not) a semi automatic weapon. If someone like that threatened the local prinicple the same thing would have happened - he would have been arrested.
Add the fact that the guy was saying "Kill me, kill me" is another indication that this guy was unstable.
So let me review
Secret Service - not associated to the excutive branch
Loonatic making death threats - authorities take threats serious and arrest the guy.
Its quite a leap to take that and have
he was posting it on the internet, supposedly the last bastion of free-speech on this planet
Hooray for the Patriot Act!
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.
- Its not the ranting on the internet, but threatening the life of anyone certainly is. The courts will decide if he did or didn't
You call for blind loyalty when its a case of blind hatred :disappoin
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
I really thought you were too smart to be blinded by candidate loyalty - well, I did.
"Phoenix police records indicate that Secret Service special agent Ray Lebeau requested help from Phoenix police to look for Walsh and that he was in need of psychiatric evaluation."
One: WHO does the Secret Service work for, and WHO was this agent attempting to "protect", when he contacted local authorities?
Two: Just like they would ask in court, in the T.V. crime dramas, "So, you're a psychiatrist now?" - defense, to the agent that apparently not only harrassed him to "talk" to him, but gave a psychiatric evaluation to local authorities. Hell, even real psychiatrists don't give remote diagnosis, unless by video-phone, or closed circuit.
Three: Even the man's condition during the arrest, as written by the police, cannot be completely trusted. Remember, the victor writes the history. Also, we have no clue how a man would react, after being harrassed continually by government agents, of an administration he has spoken against. He probably expected to be just silenced, upon arrest, and/or capture, so he was in martyr mode, when they arrested him. Feelings of Gestapo, maybe?
Either way, your apparent blindness/apathy to the sitauation scares me - from a claimed Libertarian, no less.
I'm sure you'll come up with a smart way to de-rationalize what I have just stated, and you'll come up with some way to "pooh-pooh" my thoughts. Should I start calling you an apologist?
This has nothing to do with canidate loyalty. Anyone who is threatened by someone else should be investigated and if it meets the requirements for an arrest, then one should be made.
It scares me that because some are so blinded by their hatred for Bush that they are using this as a reason to bash him. What part did he or his administration play? The secret service reports to congress - not the executive branch. This isn't a rationalization, its the facts.
Consider all the blogs and threads on the web that bad mouth or call for the death of Bush and now there is ONE guy who's been arrested because he made a threat and owns (legally or not) a semi automatic weapon. If someone like that threatened the local prinicple the same thing would have happened - he would have been arrested.
Add the fact that the guy was saying "Kill me, kill me" is another indication that this guy was unstable.
So let me review
Secret Service - not associated to the excutive branch
Loonatic making death threats - authorities take threats serious and arrest the guy.
Its quite a leap to take that and have
he was posting it on the internet, supposedly the last bastion of free-speech on this planet
Hooray for the Patriot Act!
Kiss goodbye to your right to free speech courtesy of George W[armonger] Bush!
Unless they can prove that he was actually PLOTTING the assasination, and/or was organizing people over the internet to do such, what ranting he did over the internet does NOT warrant what happened.
- Its not the ranting on the internet, but threatening the life of anyone certainly is. The courts will decide if he did or didn't
You call for blind loyalty when its a case of blind hatred :disappoin
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Murco
07-02-2004, 09:44 PM
Not at all. The guy was responding in an excessive manner to an excessive event.Report a crime to the police,and they'll most likely shrug,issue you with the paperwork for your insurance claim,and go back to eating their donuts.
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
Do you live in the US, Naki? No, so how would you know how our police react to crimes, TV? Whacky internet sources?
And do you really think the Bush administration sent the SWAT team after him?
You have a very vivid imagination and far too much time on your hands...
:disappoin
Exercise your right to free speech,however,and they'll send the spooks looking for you.The man made no threats of violence against Bush.Wishing someone dead is not the same as announcing an intention to kill him.
Clearly the guy is unstable,but no more unstable than an administration that sends a S.W.A.T. team with weapons drawn in search of its critics.
Once again,it looks increasingly like something that Saddam would do. :disappoin
Do you live in the US, Naki? No, so how would you know how our police react to crimes, TV? Whacky internet sources?
And do you really think the Bush administration sent the SWAT team after him?
You have a very vivid imagination and far too much time on your hands...
:disappoin
werwolf-23
07-03-2004, 05:11 AM
Snoozes from me -- free speech has been going out the window for a long time. (http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/feature.html)
[/quote=YogsVR4]Edit: I forgot to mention that the administration can't order the Secret Service to do anything. They work for the Congress.[/quote]
Nit picked: They work for Treasury (originally being counter-counterfeiters exclusively): http://www.ustreas.gov/usss/index.shtml and, I'm reasonably sure, now that they're under Homeland Security the executive branch actually COULD give them specific missions.
Do I think the White House did?
Of course not. I would be (even more) appalled by the administration if they had nothing better to do than go harrass people who post idiocy on the Net. C'mon, that's just ridiculous... I'm thinking what we have here is just an example of stupid post-9/11 police/public paranoia.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein
[/quote=YogsVR4]Edit: I forgot to mention that the administration can't order the Secret Service to do anything. They work for the Congress.[/quote]
Nit picked: They work for Treasury (originally being counter-counterfeiters exclusively): http://www.ustreas.gov/usss/index.shtml and, I'm reasonably sure, now that they're under Homeland Security the executive branch actually COULD give them specific missions.
Do I think the White House did?
Of course not. I would be (even more) appalled by the administration if they had nothing better to do than go harrass people who post idiocy on the Net. C'mon, that's just ridiculous... I'm thinking what we have here is just an example of stupid post-9/11 police/public paranoia.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025