Oh, shit. I have heard outrageous stories like this about political stickers and such; this is the first I've heard about a livejournal post. Thanks for passing this along; I'm going to link it in my lj since the author gave permission to publically make it an example.
Reminds me of Pat Finerty's talk.bizarre post about Bush I; he too had a visit from the Secret Service and, I believe, ended up on probation. I can't dig up the original post from 1992, but here's one referencing it (http://groups.google.com/groups?q=1992Nov5.063938.11566%40mnemosyne.cs.du.edu&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&selm=JON.92Nov5172406%40zeus.med.utah.edu&rnum=3).
FYI: don't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater either ... or make certain kinds of jokes while in the airport. (you are not even allowed to make certain jokes about certain jokes in airports ... for some reason people dealing with airports are "funny" that way ...).
It's the Secret Service's job to check out threats against the president, to see if they are creditable (is that the right word?).
Even presidents you might not have voted for ...
What surprises me is that they've got the time to check out them all out (maybe they just do a random sampling?).
I wonder how long it was between the time the person made the threat, and the Secret Service came knocking?
I just have a hard time believing a 23-year-old woman who mostly blogs about fanfiction was seen as a 'creditable threat'. I think that this sort of stuff should get filed under shouting on streetcorners, as free speech.
I helped with the investigation of a man threatening Reagan; he was sent up. It's disingenuous at best, otherwise ignorant or malicious, to fuss as if this started happening under Ashcroft and Bush; it's been happening since Kennedy. ""Bringing freedom to the world" while suppressing it here at home." Suppose you state how this would have been better handled? Ignore it because all internet users, or all LJ users, are innocuous by definition, no matter what they say? Harris and Klebold. Investigate only after shots fired? Atta. Jail her on suspicion and investigate later? Chirac. Disappear her? Allende. Her 'friend' ratted her out, the Secret Service checked her out, determined she was not credible as a threat and there was no probable cause to arrest her, and she walked. This worked the way it has been working in this country for at least 40 years; this worked the way it is supposed to work. Where in this is the suppression of freedom?
There's a connection between thoughts, words, actions and consequences. Not every reader's a good buddy. How are these lessons harsh?
Here's a capture of her journal, before she deleted the post in question. (http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:1axmjyHF8G4J:www.livejournal.com/users/anniesj/+anniesj&hl=en&client=firefox-a) I think it's pretty clear the girl is not a credible threat, based on what she's been posting. Perhaps if the authorities aren't wasting their time and resources on stuff like that, they will catch the next Harris and Klebold before anyone gets shot.
I don't think that internet users should be ignored. But I do think that common sense should be applied before taking action on that level. And she has a record now? That is the scary part to me.
The thing is, how many times has somebody who did try to kill somebody posted something as innocuous sounding as that? I don't know, and I assume you don't either. Maybe there are crazy nutsos whose pre-attack ranting sounds like that. The SS doesn't want to get caught with their pants down; it's easier to go meet somebody in person than to read through their whole LJ (wondering what locked posts they're not seeing) and try to draw conclusions from that public persona.
The guy who does websnark.com (a mostly-webcomics review site) wrote this in his last entry:
Guys, they've killed four Presidents. And wounded one. And shot at two more. There are people who shoot at Presidents because they want to commit suicide. There are people who shoot at Presidents because they want to impress girls. There are people who shoot at Presidents because they believe they're going to save the world. The President is a world leader, and they've been assassinating World Leaders about as long as we've had a concept of 'world' and 'leadership.'
So. This girl got a visit by the Secret Service. And by her own account they were reasonable and nice, and drank coffee with the girl and her family, and were perfectly satisfied that the girl was not a threat. She was upset, however, that someone turned her in, and she was upset, however, that she now has an FBI file that says she once threatened the President.
For many people who read the Internet, reporting threats to the President isn't optional. It's required. If a Livejournal user who calls himself "Berstanpeniswang" claims he's going to kill President Catgirl because he doesn't like the way she wears pink, and a United States Marine reads that message, he is obligated to report it.
I'm not sure where this obligation supposedly comes from, but I think he has a point. The FBI file thing is kind of overkill, but you know, maybe they just have to log all the reports anyway, so it's not a matter of choice on their part. There may be a certain amount of intimidation in telling her about it, but bottom line, the initimidation is not "don't criticize the president" or "don't wish the president loses the next election", it's just intimidation about saying you wish certain very specific and narrow kinds of ill-will against people which I'm avoiding naming just to avoid any possible misconstrual of this sentence.
So, I dunno, it just doesn't seem that big a deal to me. Maybe I'm just blase since it happened before with Finerty, and it happened before with Old Man Murray. Maybe we're all only four degrees away from somebody it happened to IRL.
Checked out the site and couldn't find the post. It seems to have been waxed, or I don't have the internet savvy to find it even on a simple capture. From what is there, it does appear that if you listened near her ear, you could hear the ocean. But if I were the investigating officer, I'd have still been required to check it out. On the other hand, I believe pretty strongly that law enforcement on all levels in this country makes far too little use of the filing-a-false-report charge.
Long, long ago, I refused to pay LBJ's phone tax, which he had set up solely for the Vietnam war. And got visited by agents, one of whom was nice and one of whom acted as if she thought she would get contact cooties. They then levied on my bank account (which they had found) and I ended up having it paid under compulsion. Plus extra fees which the bank doubled every month. Rice grains on the chessboard - eventually they beat me based purely on economics. But doubtless I too have 'a record.' If so it never came up in a subsequent career which included law enforcement, and was never mentioned when FBI guys were interviewing me about security clearances for friends. It doesn't seem to have been very scary.
But if it were? I don't get your point. I chose not to cooperate in a war I then thought immoral. This woman takes a moral position, but shouldn't have to own its consequences? This woman doesn't think she was taking a moral position, and therefore should have skated?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ilanarama![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 07:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 11:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 07:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 08:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 11:03 pm (UTC)*is old*
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 08:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 09:54 pm (UTC)I am hoping this is irony, not repression.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 09:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 11:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 11:06 pm (UTC)FYI: don't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater either ...
or make certain kinds of jokes while in the airport.
(you are not even allowed to make certain jokes about
certain jokes in airports ... for some reason people
dealing with airports are "funny" that way ...).
It's the Secret Service's job to check out threats against
the president, to see if they are creditable (is that the right word?).
Even presidents you might not have voted for ...
What surprises me is that they've got the time to check out them
all out (maybe they just do a random sampling?).
I wonder how long it was between the time the person made the threat,
and the Secret Service came knocking?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-27 11:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-28 12:06 am (UTC)It looked like to me that the Secret Service
knocked on her door to determine if she was
or was not a creditable threat.
Once they determined she was not, they left.
I'm not sure how else they could determine
the potential threat level.
Next week if Kerry wins, I'm sure the SS will
be visiting right-wingers households.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-28 03:57 am (UTC)There's a connection between thoughts, words, actions and consequences. Not every reader's a good buddy. How are these lessons harsh?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-28 04:18 am (UTC)I don't think that internet users should be ignored. But I do think that common sense should be applied before taking action on that level. And she has a record now? That is the scary part to me.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-28 11:38 am (UTC)The guy who does websnark.com (a mostly-webcomics review site) wrote this in his last entry:
I'm not sure where this obligation supposedly comes from, but I think he has a point. The FBI file thing is kind of overkill, but you know, maybe they just have to log all the reports anyway, so it's not a matter of choice on their part. There may be a certain amount of intimidation in telling her about it, but bottom line, the initimidation is not "don't criticize the president" or "don't wish the president loses the next election", it's just intimidation about saying you wish certain very specific and narrow kinds of ill-will against people which I'm avoiding naming just to avoid any possible misconstrual of this sentence.
So, I dunno, it just doesn't seem that big a deal to me. Maybe I'm just blase since it happened before with Finerty, and it happened before with Old Man Murray. Maybe we're all only four degrees away from somebody it happened to IRL.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-10-28 06:46 pm (UTC)Long, long ago, I refused to pay LBJ's phone tax, which he had set up solely for the Vietnam war. And got visited by agents, one of whom was nice and one of whom acted as if she thought she would get contact cooties. They then levied on my bank account (which they had found) and I ended up having it paid under compulsion. Plus extra fees which the bank doubled every month. Rice grains on the chessboard - eventually they beat me based purely on economics. But doubtless I too have 'a record.' If so it never came up in a subsequent career which included law enforcement, and was never mentioned when FBI guys were interviewing me about security clearances for friends. It doesn't seem to have been very scary.
But if it were? I don't get your point. I chose not to cooperate in a war I then thought immoral. This woman takes a moral position, but shouldn't have to own its consequences? This woman doesn't think she was taking a moral position, and therefore should have skated?