Assassination. An option? Since when?

Sunshine

Trust the pie.
Dec 17, 2009
19,377
3,398
183
Atlanta, Georgia (CNN) -- The U.S. Secret Service is looking into a controversial column by an Atlanta Jewish newspaper publisher that mulled the assassination of an American president.

Andrew Adler, owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, wrote a January 13 column about the threat of Iran to Israel. He posed three options for the Jewish state to counter the Iranian regime.

One of them called for a "hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence."

"Give the go-ahead for U.S. based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies."

U.S. Secret Service spokesman George Ogilvie told CNN Saturday, "We are aware of it. We are taking the appropriate investigative steps."

Wow. I can't believe this. Who doesn't know it is a felony to threaten a US president?

And what purpose would it serve? The vice president of the same stripe would be next in line!

Edited to add link: http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/21/us/jewish-president-threat/index.html?iref=allsearch

Sorry, didn't mean to forget it.
 
Last edited:
I don't see anyone actually threatening or calling for an assassination... just listing options from an Israeli perspective. What's the big deal?

Since you haven't linked to the entire article, perhaps I missed something that I might be 'outraged' about.
 
I don't see anyone actually threatening or calling for an assassination... just listing options from an Israeli perspective. What's the big deal?

Since you haven't linked to the entire article, perhaps I missed something that I might be 'outraged' about.

link has been added.

The secret service may not completely agree with you. At least according to the article.
 
I don't see anyone actually threatening or calling for an assassination... just listing options from an Israeli perspective. What's the big deal?

Since you haven't linked to the entire article, perhaps I missed something that I might be 'outraged' about.

link has been added.

The secret service may not completely agree with you. At least according to the article.

The Secret Service have a habit of over reacting to what they perceive as a 'threat'. With good reason... but I see nothing to get hysterical about.
 
I don't see anyone actually threatening or calling for an assassination... just listing options from an Israeli perspective. What's the big deal?

Since you haven't linked to the entire article, perhaps I missed something that I might be 'outraged' about.

link has been added.

The secret service may not completely agree with you. At least according to the article.

The Secret Service have a habit of over reacting to what they perceive as a 'threat'. With good reason... but I see nothing to get hysterical about.

They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.
 
Last edited:

So a 'what if' scenario lists options as to what Israel might do. Again, I'm not seeing the reason for any outrage.

Just saying something like this would not be such a big deal except it is willfully published by the owner of a newspaper, I don't know if he is indictable but he certainly crossed the line of journalistic responsibility. He is openly selling the idea that the assassination of the president would save Israel from destruction, who knows who may buy such an outlandish and dangerous idea.
 
Last edited:
Sorry bout that,


1. I see this as egregious!:evil:
2. Some one should be going to jail over this.:eusa_whistle:
3. This is one of those moments that who ever wrote that should be asking themselves "Did I actually say that in public?" or "Out Loud":lol:
4. This is a threat to our Nation, and we just have to take action on this.:eek:
5. I can not agree with pretty much anything the President stands for, but he is still the President, and I don't want him assassinated.
6. I want him just impeached.:lol:
7. History will show he is the crookedest mofo President ever to be in the White House.:lol:


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
 
link has been added.

The secret service may not completely agree with you. At least according to the article.

The Secret Service have a habit of over reacting to what they perceive as a 'threat'. With good reason... but I see nothing to get hysterical about.

They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.

Well, I get paid to write... and I see nothing that alludes to him alluding to homicide. It's a 'what if' scenario and you are being ridiculous by drawing parallels based on your meaningless experience.

Had I been writing a similar 'what if' article, I would probably have included the same possibility. It's meaningless.
 
Sorry bout that,



The Secret Service have a habit of over reacting to what they perceive as a 'threat'. With good reason... but I see nothing to get hysterical about.

They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.

Well, I get paid to write... and I see nothing that alludes to him alluding to homicide. It's a 'what if' scenario and you are being ridiculous by drawing parallels based on your meaningless experience.

Had I been writing a similar 'what if' article, I would probably have included the same possibility. It's meaningless.




1. In a lot of ways CaliGirl, you are the *voice of reason* on this site.
2. And I think its great you can do nothing but pin some stuff and get a pay check.:clap2:
3. This rag is projecting an outcome, that may be suitable for another country, claiming it, *just might be doable*.
4. Or a viable course of action.
5. Sure you can see that its wrong to suggest that?
6. Israel as a Nation is our Brother, so they crossed the line putting that on the printed page.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
 

So a 'what if' scenario lists options as to what Israel might do. Again, I'm not seeing the reason for any outrage.

Just saying something like this would not be such a big deal except it is willfully published by the owner of a newspaper, I don't know if he is indictable but he certainly crossed the line of journalistic responsibility. He is openly selling the idea that the assassination of the president would save Israel from destruction, who knows who may buy such an outlandish and dangerous idea.

I agree. And it does tend to make me wonder to what extent this could be considered incitement.
 
The Secret Service have a habit of over reacting to what they perceive as a 'threat'. With good reason... but I see nothing to get hysterical about.

They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.

Well, I get paid to write... and I see nothing that alludes to him alluding to homicide. It's a 'what if' scenario and you are being ridiculous by drawing parallels based on your meaningless experience.

Had I been writing a similar 'what if' article, I would probably have included the same possibility. It's meaningless.

Pretending to be a writer is a meaningful experience? LOL. You would likely have gotten the knock on the door already.
 
Sorry bout that,



They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.

Well, I get paid to write... and I see nothing that alludes to him alluding to homicide. It's a 'what if' scenario and you are being ridiculous by drawing parallels based on your meaningless experience.

Had I been writing a similar 'what if' article, I would probably have included the same possibility. It's meaningless.




1. In a lot of ways CaliGirl, you are the *voice of reason* on this site.
2. And I think its great you can do nothing but pin some stuff and get a pay check.:clap2:
3. This rag is projecting an outcome, that may be suitable for another country, claiming it, *just might be doable*.
4. Or a viable course of action.
5. Sure you can see that its wrong to suggest that?
6. Israel as a Nation is our Brother, so they crossed the line putting that on the printed page.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Exactly. And the SS apparently thinks so as well.
 
Last edited:
First, the Secret Service is too good at their job.
Secondly, you should restrict mulling those prospects over, only in your mind on a Sunday Morning, quietly to yourself, as you kneel and pray for the welfare of this country.
 
They get paid to react the way they do. Having worked in psychiatry for 22 years, I can tell you that a person even alluding to homicide would be high risk. I understand their pain. No one wants to be the sacrificial goat when something happens. And one who is in the position to evaluate behavior/potential behavior of others is also at risk for becoming the scapegoat if they make the wrong call.

Well, I get paid to write... and I see nothing that alludes to him alluding to homicide. It's a 'what if' scenario and you are being ridiculous by drawing parallels based on your meaningless experience.

Had I been writing a similar 'what if' article, I would probably have included the same possibility. It's meaningless.

Pretending to be a writer is a meaningful experience? LOL. You would likely have gotten the knock on the door already.

Oh, what an intelligent response.

Sad cow.
 
Again, for the mentally challenged, the piece is based on a scenario of what steps an Israeli government might take in a specific scenario. Anyone who sees this as anything 'threatening' has some intellectual issues.
 
Again, for the mentally challenged, the piece is based on a scenario of what steps an Israeli government might take in a specific scenario. Anyone who sees this as anything 'threatening' has some intellectual issues.

Oh, what an intelligent response.

Sad cow.
 

Forum List

Back
Top