The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
UK teen banned from US?
Beren39
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Story here
This really felt like a hoax to me but it's been confirmed by a number of news sites. I'm not really sure the extent to which free speech of non-US citizens is protected but this strikes me as incredibly petty and ridiculous. The full content of the email is not currently known so it may have been much more vulgar and threatening then simply calling Obama a "prick", but regardless this seems like a overreaction on the part of the FBI. Can you really ban someone from a country for insulting its current leader?
This really felt like a hoax to me but it's been confirmed by a number of news sites. I'm not really sure the extent to which free speech of non-US citizens is protected but this strikes me as incredibly petty and ridiculous. The full content of the email is not currently known so it may have been much more vulgar and threatening then simply calling Obama a "prick", but regardless this seems like a overreaction on the part of the FBI. Can you really ban someone from a country for insulting its current leader?
Go, Go, EXCALIBUR! - Trent Varsity Swim Team 2009, better watch out for me Phelps!
Beren39 on
0
Posts
Seems reasonable to me.
I don't know what the specific threats were, but if someone threatens the President I doubt the FBI or Secret Service would respond with "Oh yeah? Prove it"
Sure but from a stupid, drunk 17 year old? It's not like he was shouting this out in an airport.
Pretty much. You can't fire off attacks at political leaders and not expect there to be a price. I shot off "god fuck the queen" I wouldn't expect to be wanted in London.
Threats on leaders are taken seriously.
Maybe Obama should invite him for a beer to smooth things over?
What would you consider an appropriate response in this situation, because I do not see anything wrong with telling him he is not welcome here after he threatens the president. That is not something that is taken lightly, regardless of how totes wasted he was.
And that's taking it in good faith that he was drunk
So unless we want to assume that this kid is white and therefore totally not a potential terrorist, that's kind of how we have to treat him.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Awesome!
Can I send President Obama an email saying he's doing a good job and to ignore all the haters?
Damnit! Who typed a question mark on the Teleprompter? For the last time, anything you put on that prompter, Burgundy will read.
:P
Do you think your visa application is easier if you have a record of sending praising emails to the White House?
Oh buttons, I'm jolly-well in the soup, eh chaps?
So, what you're implying is, profiling is the right way to go with criminal activity.
No but I think you need to look at the context of the 'threat', if only the FBI invested its resources and responded with such expediency to all such things.
Seems like an easy fix to me.
"Sir, we have a report of some kid in the UK threatening the President."
"Bar him from entering the US. Done? Great. Let's get lunch."
There is no context. The only thing that we know about the actual e-mail is that Dumbshit McBrittykid sent it after watching a movie about September 11 and cqalled the President a "p*****".
Threatening the president is serious business.
What are you getting at? 17 year olds cannot be 'dangerous'?
Pretty much, it's not like it's that big of a deal.
Seriously though, I'd find it pretty funny if it were me. "Yeah, one time I got drunk and emailed the President of another nation. Now I'm banned from that entire country. And that, kids, is why you should never mix drinking and internets."
Yeah, it's not like entering the US from a foreign country is some international right. As I understanding it, it's something of a hot-button issue. Pre-empting people who would check "Yes" next to the "Have you ever threatened this nation's leader(s)?" question on the entry questionnaire doesn't seem like a huge deal to me.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Rigorous Scholarship
1st Amendment does not cover threatening political figures.
She posted a warning after the visit from SS, basically saying "don't do what I did. What I did was stupid." Because talking smack about the president in a public forum, if you don't choose your words very carefully... is very stupid.
It depends what you say and what sort of forum. A journalist talking shit on a program, not an issue. Some random screwball making threats, yeah they'll get pissed.
Rigorous Scholarship
Journalists at major news organizations tend to have an understanding as to what is protected speech and what is a threat.
Plus journalists (even Fox News "journalists") are a little smarter than your average internet moron about what they can and cant get away with saying. "I think the President is a racist" = safe. Direct threats against the President... probably not.
I think many of you are too quick to defend the U.S. here. Some seventeen year old send a president a silly e-mail. We don't know what it said, and I'm not willing to give the U.S. the benefit of the doubt here. If the e-mail constituted a credible threat, then yeah, I might be able to get behind a ban. But I have my doubts.
As I understand it, all threats are treated as 'credible'.
When he does, he should be cremated and have his ashes spread in DC.
It was a personal blog, and it wasn't a threat, although it was some nasty rhetoric.
Perhaps it was just some overzealous new agent or something.
Way back when I still regularly posted on Fark it was pretty well known that Drew Curtis had cooperated with the SS when a commenter or two had crossed the line into threatening language, they do take that kind of thing very seriously.
I guess I'd have to see the text of the email to really render judgement in this case. But I'm going to guess it probably crossed the line into actual threats, otherwise why waste the time to teach one moron an ocean's length away a lesson?
Prick, probably.
My understanding is that any threat against the US President is taken at face value, because there isn't any reasonable line you can draw for credibility without guaranteeing that you will be wrong a significant proportion of the time.