Active Users:1153 Time:22/11/2024 11:43:29 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
I read what you said & understood it as you restate here, hence I referenced local police (twice) Joel Send a noteboard - 20/01/2011 02:15:17 AM
I've no idea why you keep thinking something in what I said translated as "Secret Service ignores threats to congressmen". They are law enforcement, they certainly can and presumably do alert the proper authorities to any major possible crime they expect, they do not protect congressmen, same as they don't protect SCOTUS, governors, or anyone else unless they qualify for one of the following.

I have no idea why you think
Congressmens safety is very much under their jurisdiction; who else would be responsible, the local police.... Congressmens safety is very much under their jurisdiction; are you seriously saying that if they knew of a credible threat to a member of the federal government they'd just call the local police and leave it to them? Can you imagine the political firestorm and bureaucratic scandal if Sheriff Lobo wasn't up to the task, either screwed it up or couldn't get there before an professional assassin?

means I thought you said the Secret Service ignores threats to Congressmen. Who's reading whom to mean what they please...?
Today, the Secret Service is authorized by law to protect:
The President, the Vice President, the President-elect and Vice President-elect
The immediate families of the above individuals
Former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes except when the spouse remarries. In 1997, legislation became effective limiting Secret Service protection to former Presidents for a period of not more than 10 years from the date the former President leaves office
Children of former Presidents until age 16 or 5 years after the presidency
Former Vice Presidents until 6 months after their term ends: (the Secretary of Homeland Security can extend the protection time.)
Families of former Vice Presidents until 6 months after term ends
Visiting heads of states or governments and their spouses traveling with them, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States, and official representatives of the United States performing special missions abroad whom the president deems important enough for protection outside the Diplomatic Security Service
Major presidential and vice presidential candidates, and their spouses within 120 days of a general presidential election
Other individuals as designated per executive order of the President
National Special Security Events, when designated as such by the Secretary of Homeland Security

I find it difficult to believe the Secret Service would respond to a credible public threat against a US Congressman with "Sorry, we're only legally authorized to protect the President, VP, candidates for those offices and their families, so we can't help you--but we'll request an executive order on your behalf and call your local police to let them know an Al Qaeda hit squad is on the way! :)" Perhaps I'm wrong about that; the meaning of of "legally authorized" makes all the difference here, and if that makes it ILLEGAL for them to provide anyone else protection (as bizarre as that sounds) I'll eat my words. ONLY mine though; I read and fully understood your statement, as my response at the time indicates, yet you incorrectly stated I misread you because YOU misread ME. Yeah, I understand your frustration QUITE well; hopefully you're beginning to grasp mine....
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS. Joel - 16/01/2011 12:18:22 PM 1988 Views
Why are they calling it "blood libel"? Camilla - 16/01/2011 12:23:47 PM 851 Views
Because if the facts were as they represent them those words would be applicable. Joel - 16/01/2011 12:49:22 PM 1027 Views
It's not entirely clear to me whether you're aware of this or not, but... Legolas - 16/01/2011 01:12:22 PM 1072 Views
That's why I said, "popularized". Joel - 16/01/2011 01:46:52 PM 1023 Views
I think Alan Dershowitz dealt with this nonsense already Isaac - 16/01/2011 02:34:10 PM 1366 Views
Interesting. I didn't realize it was so wide-spread. Legolas - 16/01/2011 03:10:28 PM 925 Views
She wasn't even the first to use the term that week either Isaac - 16/01/2011 10:10:35 PM 928 Views
I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it. Legolas - 16/01/2011 10:18:54 PM 956 Views
Re: I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it. Isaac - 16/01/2011 11:30:38 PM 852 Views
Oh please don't you start to random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:34:43 PM 808 Views
I for one hadn't noticed it before. Legolas - 17/01/2011 10:25:57 PM 979 Views
it was used here and nobody commented random thoughts - 17/01/2011 10:37:07 PM 867 Views
LOL, I totally forgot that got posted here Isaac - 17/01/2011 10:54:26 PM 919 Views
It's funny you should say that... Legolas - 18/01/2011 10:32:59 PM 951 Views
Precisely: I noticed, but it hadn't become a rallying cry for "the real victim" (Palin). Joel - 19/01/2011 12:14:48 AM 1059 Views
I thought you were the real vicitim random thoughts - 19/01/2011 02:49:06 PM 1032 Views
When and where did I say that? The ultimate victim is America, but six members of it just died. Joel - 19/01/2011 11:24:27 PM 753 Views
Re: It's funny you should say that... Isaac - 19/01/2011 03:29:52 PM 937 Views
It was permissible to ignore until it became a rallying cry. Joel - 20/01/2011 04:27:23 PM 961 Views
A rallying cry is hardly illegal Isaac - 20/01/2011 05:32:45 PM 1013 Views
I never said it was. Joel - 20/01/2011 06:59:39 PM 1145 Views
Oh, I noticed that one alright. Legolas - 18/01/2011 10:25:23 PM 791 Views
but is he accussed of being a tasteless moron who doesn't know what it means? random thoughts - 19/01/2011 02:28:03 PM 837 Views
I don't know, if I have to judge him based on that one article, then tasteless moron, absolutely. Legolas - 19/01/2011 06:14:43 PM 950 Views
compared to the way similar terms are used? random thoughts - 19/01/2011 06:58:02 PM 937 Views
I meant I hadn't seen it used in different contexts before. Legolas - 19/01/2011 07:35:00 PM 917 Views
The peole who called her stupid for using the term didn't know it was so wide spread either random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:33:19 PM 810 Views
Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him. Joel - 16/01/2011 10:24:09 PM 1004 Views
Re: Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him. Isaac - 16/01/2011 11:09:21 PM 1033 Views
Again, Giffords specifically made the connection between Palins imagery and an attack on her. Joel - 17/01/2011 12:53:08 AM 1172 Views
That means precisely nothing Isaac - 17/01/2011 03:59:07 PM 870 Views
It means everything. Joel - 18/01/2011 08:34:55 PM 1139 Views
I'm trying to understand your logic Chas - 19/01/2011 12:50:28 AM 744 Views
There are two points: Joel - 19/01/2011 02:47:48 AM 931 Views
I don't agree, but I understand. *NM* Chas - 19/01/2011 10:14:13 PM 458 Views
Giffords' statements and Palins are matters of public record; they're indisputable. Joel - 19/01/2011 11:34:53 PM 908 Views
I must say, if more people on both sides could say that we'd all be better for it. Joel - 20/01/2011 04:32:55 AM 951 Views
Re: It means everything. Isaac - 19/01/2011 05:55:02 PM 770 Views
That's simply illogical. Joel - 20/01/2011 01:08:51 AM 1148 Views
the old step one steal underwear step three profit argument random thoughts - 19/01/2011 06:01:14 PM 1024 Views
Your inability/unwillingness to follow basic and clearly delineated logic is not my failing. Joel - 20/01/2011 01:19:31 AM 845 Views
I admit I can't follow gnome logic *NM* random thoughts - 20/01/2011 05:50:22 AM 447 Views
I demonstrated the connection, whether or not you choose to look the other way. Joel - 20/01/2011 03:16:28 PM 922 Views
that is some twisted and bizarre logic random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:38:41 PM 968 Views
Giffords said Palins crosshairs imagery would have "consequences"; Palin calls the suggestion libel. Joel - 18/01/2011 08:54:45 PM 861 Views
yes but the only consequences is liberals using them to slander Palin random thoughts - 19/01/2011 02:58:35 PM 942 Views
I read Toms reply; I don't think he exactly vindicated your position, nor meant to do so. Joel - 20/01/2011 01:52:37 AM 1177 Views
It was an example of blaming the victim, a phrase you keep misusing random thoughts - 20/01/2011 06:28:21 PM 882 Views
I thought you said only liberals blinded by political bias committed that grave sin. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:47:09 PM 930 Views
so in other words you again missed the point random thoughts - 20/01/2011 08:26:49 PM 879 Views
Well, one of us did. Joel - 20/01/2011 09:24:35 PM 993 Views
so lets be clear do you or don't you understand what it means to "blame the vicitm"? random thoughts - 20/01/2011 10:03:48 PM 635 Views
I understand it well; can we be equally clear you say the victim here is Palin? Joel - 20/01/2011 10:44:08 PM 1068 Views
So I am a little confused on something... MightyYT - 16/01/2011 02:38:59 PM 1025 Views
Palin putting Giffords district in the crosshairs and Giffords implying at the time she feared this Joel - 16/01/2011 11:21:36 PM 1161 Views
If I understand what you are saying correctly... MightyYT - 17/01/2011 07:07:56 AM 897 Views
I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand. Joel - 17/01/2011 08:33:47 AM 908 Views
Re: I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand. Isaac - 17/01/2011 04:24:01 PM 961 Views
The Secret Service does guard Congressmen, just not all of them automatically. Joel - 18/01/2011 09:13:39 PM 796 Views
No, they don't Isaac - 18/01/2011 10:19:34 PM 983 Views
Really? Cannoli says differently, and I believe he's right on that one. Joel - 18/01/2011 10:50:51 PM 1064 Views
You seem to be reading what you want to from what I said Isaac - 19/01/2011 01:27:32 PM 911 Views
I read what you said & understood it as you restate here, hence I referenced local police (twice) Joel - 20/01/2011 02:15:17 AM 949 Views
The problem here is your ignoring normal policing powers to concoct an absurdity Isaac - 20/01/2011 04:20:25 PM 997 Views
More absurd than the notion such incitement warrants no notice? Joel - 20/01/2011 05:42:47 PM 1059 Views
really because people post that kind of crap daily and nothing happens random thoughts - 20/01/2011 05:57:52 PM 854 Views
I thought waterboarding was OK and any suggestion to the contrary was terrorist sympathizing. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:54:05 PM 808 Views
way to dodge the point again random thoughts - 20/01/2011 08:34:33 PM 816 Views
Do you have an example of a credible threat of injury to a Congressman, or calls for one? Joel - 20/01/2011 10:02:53 PM 899 Views
Your shifting your original premise, *again* Isaac - 20/01/2011 08:24:18 PM 883 Views
No, you're simply missing the point of it. Joel - 20/01/2011 11:09:57 PM 880 Views
There is no point Isaac - 21/01/2011 12:22:30 AM 928 Views
If I had no point I wouldn't bother, but fair enough. Joel - 21/01/2011 01:20:32 AM 1176 Views
Uh...Last I checked conservatives didn't list the Communist Manifesto as a favourite book. Dragonsoul - 16/01/2011 03:05:07 PM 1198 Views
You're awesome at missing points, aren't you? Dannymac - 16/01/2011 07:26:30 PM 942 Views
where is the accountability for those committing slander? random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:52:40 PM 852 Views
Libs hate Mein Kampf and We the Living; conservatives hate the Communist Manifesto: He's neither. Joel - 16/01/2011 10:06:02 PM 898 Views
conseartives hate Mein Kampf and liberals stil read the Communist Manifesto random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:57:22 PM 876 Views
That first line is says it all. Joel - 18/01/2011 09:34:06 PM 960 Views
Nazis had more in common with communist then capitalist random thoughts - 19/01/2011 04:10:09 PM 1066 Views
The founder of fascism called it "the merger of corporate and national power". Joel - 20/01/2011 02:51:09 AM 949 Views
and that is supposed to mean something? random thoughts - 20/01/2011 06:06:18 PM 988 Views
YOU are cherry picking. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:50:21 PM 894 Views
It is to be expected that this site would be libtard central... Shannow - 16/01/2011 05:23:53 PM 1153 Views
See my reply to Dragonsoul above. Dannymac - 16/01/2011 07:30:40 PM 1003 Views
Yeah, your first was better Isaac - 16/01/2011 09:48:58 PM 815 Views
Again, I don't think Palin intended this, but Giffords feared ten months ago that this could result. Joel - 16/01/2011 11:29:19 PM 959 Views
And I call bullshit Cannoli - 18/01/2011 03:12:13 PM 1100 Views
If Palin wants to accuse Giffords of libel she should have the guts to do it to her face. Joel - 18/01/2011 10:39:07 PM 1057 Views
So if some jihadist shot Gifford, would you also blame Palin? Shannow - 19/01/2011 02:52:42 PM 942 Views
don't get ti doesn't matter who is to blame it just matters if they can use it *NM* random thoughts - 19/01/2011 04:11:09 PM 425 Views
No, I'd blame the shooter first and the mullahs shouting, "JIHAD111" second, as I always do. Joel - 20/01/2011 03:11:33 AM 1038 Views
Then why are you even here? I pretty much agree with you entirely and I'm fairly liberal. *NM* Elaine - 18/01/2011 01:16:33 PM 534 Views
Palin didn't really have anything to do with this, but it makes sense she's blamed. Tom - 16/01/2011 10:19:51 PM 877 Views
Pretty much. Joel - 16/01/2011 11:44:35 PM 961 Views
Did they ever catch the person(s) that vandalized Gifford's office? *NM* Tashmere - 17/01/2011 03:30:36 AM 447 Views
I didn't realize someone had, but it appears a militia leader was responsible (shocking, I know). Joel - 17/01/2011 07:04:08 AM 894 Views
politcal offices are vandalized on a regular basis *NM* random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:41:29 PM 407 Views
She only asked if they caught the guy, she didn't accuse anyone, Sarah. Joel - 18/01/2011 11:27:18 PM 845 Views
OK Olberman when did I imply otherwise? *NM* random thoughts - 19/01/2011 02:48:41 PM 459 Views
"Political offices are vandalized on a regular basis". Joel - 20/01/2011 03:16:39 AM 1039 Views
Took you this long, huh? Macharius - 17/01/2011 01:53:31 PM 797 Views
I didn't want to look because I was afraid the charges against the far right demagogues might stick. Joel - 18/01/2011 11:07:26 PM 1121 Views
I am sick of the desperate attempts of liberals to find a way to use a tragedy random thoughts - 17/01/2011 02:31:18 PM 813 Views
I'm just curious. callandor1000 - 17/01/2011 03:23:47 PM 788 Views
Re: I'm just curious. Camilla - 17/01/2011 03:28:04 PM 931 Views
I always said I'd do that after Bush was re-elected. Joel - 18/01/2011 11:52:45 PM 811 Views
like I said a matter of faith random thoughts - 17/01/2011 04:27:51 PM 803 Views
I find it interesting... Jeordam - 17/01/2011 05:31:54 PM 952 Views
I mention her looks solely because... callandor1000 - 20/01/2011 02:30:42 PM 821 Views
Had that convo with the cab driver on the way home from a New Years party. Joel - 18/01/2011 11:42:07 PM 1083 Views
If slander, not mine, Giffords' (at least you don't err like Palin and say, "libel" ). Joel - 18/01/2011 11:14:23 PM 1007 Views
mark you calendar today is the day Joel offically went around the bend into insanity random thoughts - 19/01/2011 05:28:06 PM 812 Views
A mirror will show me who's to blame? On whom have I put a crosshairs? Joel - 20/01/2011 03:23:43 AM 867 Views
so it is all a matter of faith for you random thoughts - 20/01/2011 05:48:44 AM 817 Views
No, it's fairly straight forward logic. Joel - 20/01/2011 03:25:56 PM 921 Views
sorry Joel but you haven't random thoughts - 20/01/2011 03:29:49 PM 726 Views
It's there; in this thread alone people from both sides of the aisle have acknowledged that. Joel - 20/01/2011 05:51:21 PM 819 Views
only in your does the connection exisit random thoughts - 20/01/2011 06:39:35 PM 852 Views
No. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:35:09 PM 932 Views
dude wake up random thoughts - 20/01/2011 08:54:33 PM 1073 Views
Fine, I have no problem dropping the "right" label in my condemnations. Joel - 20/01/2011 10:39:34 PM 1049 Views
So in your opinion... Jeordam - 17/01/2011 05:27:58 PM 803 Views
How 'bout simply color coding them? Joel - 18/01/2011 11:21:03 PM 851 Views
Why not just blame Giffords? Cannoli - 17/01/2011 06:07:14 PM 1148 Views
Indeed, why not; Sarah Palin does. Joel - 18/01/2011 06:58:01 PM 967 Views
The left are the ones storing up hate with their pathetic slaner random thoughts - 18/01/2011 07:53:23 PM 924 Views
At least 95% of the blame is Loughners; he's a nut, but that doesn't exonerate the demagogues. Joel - 18/01/2011 11:24:11 PM 1018 Views
0% belongs to political rhetoric from the right random thoughts - 19/01/2011 02:47:56 PM 786 Views
Uh huh; it's absurd to mention right wing rhetoric when left wing rhetoric is the OBVIOUS culprit Joel - 19/01/2011 02:59:41 PM 829 Views
No leftist rhetoric? You just called a bunch of people 'dangeorus lunatics' Isaac - 19/01/2011 03:37:54 PM 798 Views
Rhetoric is one thing, but I didn't use violent imagery, did I? Joel - 20/01/2011 01:40:14 AM 1122 Views
no but the democratic party used very similar images in the same state random thoughts - 20/01/2011 06:41:19 PM 855 Views
It's news to me, but I condemn all violent inflammatory imagery and rhetoric. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:13:18 PM 825 Views
it was the national democrats random thoughts - 20/01/2011 08:32:01 PM 927 Views
Then that's equally dangerous and reprehensible and more reason to loathe the DLC and DCCC. Joel - 20/01/2011 09:49:08 PM 1196 Views
The right is not the ones claiming rhetoric is the issue random thoughts - 19/01/2011 03:58:39 PM 841 Views
"WE aren't doing it, except for when we are". Admission of guilt is a poor defense. Joel - 20/01/2011 03:25:16 AM 814 Views
The irony of this thread is not lost on me. Jacob - 19/01/2011 04:09:01 PM 991 Views
Exactly. *NM* Avendesora - 19/01/2011 04:51:40 PM 497 Views
Bizarre thread for that Soapbox Isaac - 19/01/2011 05:17:58 PM 738 Views
You missed the point, obviously. Jacob - 19/01/2011 06:04:23 PM 847 Views
so you are saying it is the same old RAFO random thoughts - 19/01/2011 06:47:24 PM 907 Views
The thread has admittedly degenerated Isaac - 19/01/2011 07:02:12 PM 764 Views
Check your NB. Noted you a response. *NM* Jacob - 19/01/2011 07:04:58 PM 477 Views
That I knew it would go this way is why I avoided looking closely for so long. Joel - 19/01/2011 11:20:44 PM 996 Views
Hey, now. I have to step in. Camilla - 20/01/2011 04:44:49 PM 1017 Views
I'm just saying a significant link can be demonstrated. Joel - 20/01/2011 07:07:27 PM 1070 Views
Re: OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS. dart_board - 22/01/2011 05:49:44 PM 1004 Views
We can debate whether it's coincidental, but the connections are documented fact Joel - 22/01/2011 08:17:24 PM 971 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes