No posts on POTUS killing, also, no posts on violent revolution

[steve2470]

I was just reading Skinner's post about the SS going for a subpoena for posters' info, who advocated assasination of the POTUS. Another thing you want to be aware of, is the Smith Act of 1940. Here is part of it:

18 U.S.C. 2385

Advocating overthrow of Government


Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002385----000-.html

I know it's easy to get passionate but just something to think about.

[misternormal]

1. I agree with the neccessity to NOT avocate harm to POTUS...

I think the drafters of the Declaration of Independence might look at the Smith Act a bit differently....

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Yep the Founders would definitely look at that more than

just a tad different... they would see it as a form of Tyranny.

[PsychoDad]

4. Wasn't it Jefferson who stated.

"The tree of Liberty needs to be watered with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants regularly".

Paraphrasing from memory.

What is certain, if our founders were alive today, they would most certainly be "hanging together" for their viewpoints, as Mr. Franklin might say.

Peace, and Liberty.

[Ian David]

7. That doesn't say the end has to be accomplished by violence.

There are non-violent ways to alter or abolish an institute of government.

Think in therms of Ghandi or Diebold or simply voting.

[misternormal]

13. The unfortunate part of history is...

... that the most sweeping and drastic changes have been accomplished in the world using violence of some sort, or a peaceful end to a violent time... I don't support violence, but historically it seems so, imho...

[Wonk]

3. I think a good gift for the President would be a chocolate gun,

and since he's so busy, you'd probably have to run up to him real quick to give it to him. - Jack Handey (SNL, paraphrased from memory)

[leveymg]

5. Serious people don't threaten things you're not prepared to do.

A serious person prepared to commit murder doesn't talk about it.

Thus, those who post and boast this nonsense likely aren't prepared or capable of doing anything.

This is just provocation by trolls, and the Secret Service knows it.

[mcscajun]

6. Even so, the Secret Service is notorious for having no sense of humor

and they're likely to put any such person on their list of folks to visit before * comes to their town.

[Ian David]

8. Nobody here on DU would want to give Bush the 20% jump in the polls...

that would come after being shot.

That would just be stupid.

That's why the Republicans ordered Reagan's shooting.

[nebenaube]

9. wait a minute....

Can't this law be applied to all the members of PNAC? and Ralph Reed and James Dobson and...? Hasn't the executive branch failed to enforce this law?

[Amonester]

10. Good point...

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/who.html
~snip~
When I read that the first few times I figured somebody had said it somewhere at some time in the past and it was an untraceable remark. But then I discovered it is currently on a website, in a document signed by all of the people to your right in September of 2000. Go right now to their site under Publications/Reports, download "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and look on page 51. There it is. That means these people stood to benefit if America had a "new Pearl Harbor" and it can be implied that they even desired one to "justify" their goals.

More at: http://www.pentagonresearch.com/who.html

~~~~

Ummm: "brings revolutionary change" (revolutionary = in the sense of against the legal Government.)

It's obvious: they failed to "protect the Government" in 2000, indeed.

Six years have gone by, and they still R failing.


Edit to note: on my 800 x 600 screen, it's on page 63 (of 90).

That "association" (PNAC) planned a violent act against America, wishing it would profit themselves (and it did).

[bigtree]

11. I have a confession . . .

. . . I thought about sending him pretzels once . . .

[leveymg]

12. I secretly voted to let the hand of Jesus "smite" him.

But, as an agnostic, I don't really count on it.

Does God read on-line polls? Does the Secret Service?