Posted on 10/24/2004 5:08:47 PM PDT by Ex-Dem
Washington D.C.'s Secret Service is investigating Charlie Brooker of the UK Guardian. The entertainment writer's weekend, anti-Bush tantrum, ending with the words, "John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr.--where are you now that we need you," was picked up by the Drudge Report,--using Brooker's provocative last words as the main headline.
Citing federal statute 18 USC 879, Florida attorney John B. Thompson, called in the Secret Service Protective Intelligence Unit. "Please do whatever is necessary to punish the UK Guardian and to educate Matt Drudge on the meaning and scope of statute 18," Thompson wrote in a letter faxed to the SS on Saturday.
Thompson's letter indicates that not only was his complaint being taken seriously by the SS, but that it had already been tipped off about the Guardian story before receipt of his letter.
"I am relieved to find out that you were alerted to this danger last evening and are working on it."
Following a telephone call to the Unit, Thompson registered surprise that the Secret Service seemed unaware of the magnitude of the Drudge Report. "(But) in calling you today, I find that you did not know that one of the most visited sites on the Internet, with more than 10 million hits every 24 hours, is highlighting this call for the assassination of President Bush by placement of it as a headline, as follows: "UK Guardian: "John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr.--where are you now that we need you?"
"This is to be found this morning at www.drudgereport.com. The owner of the Drudge Report is Matt Drudge, who lives on South Beach (Miami Beach), Florida. I would encourage the Secret Services Miami office to pay Mr. Drudge a visit to tell him he needs to comply with the law and take down that screaming red headline."
Thompson's concern is that the combined circulations of the Guardian and Drudge Report manifest a siren call to whackos among the millions of readers reached by the publications.
"As I noted in our call, my friend, who is an Assistant United States Attorney, successfully prosecuted some numbskull who was talking about killing Dan Quayle in a bar. It would seem that an American journalist who puts a threat of the above kind on his website seen by millions is being at least as reckless as the aforementioned drunk," Thompson said in his letter.
In his anti-Bush tirade, Brooker wrote: "On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us" before ending with his call for a would-be Booth, Oswald and Hinckley Jr.
The television entertainment writer seems to have his knickers in a twist about the "Bush-wears-a-wire-to-televised-debates theory.
"The internet's abuzz with speculation that Bush has been wearing a wire, receiving help from some off-stage lackey. Screen grabs appearing to show a mysterious bulge in the center of his back are being traded like Top Trumps. Prior to seeing this debate footage, I regarded this with healthy skepticism: the whole "wire" scandal was just wishful thinking on behalf of some amateur Michael Moores, I figured.
"Quite frankly, the man's either wired or mad. If it's the former, he should be flung out of office: tarred, feathered and kicked in the nuts. And if it's the latter, his behaviour goes beyond strange, and heads towards terrifying."
Brooker criticizes the American media for purportedly ignoring the wire theory. "...And then I start hunting around the internet, looking to see what the US media made of the whole "wire" debate. And they just let it die. They mentioned it in passing, called it a whacko conspiracy theory and moved on."
The American website, www.rense.com, which leans heavily on UFO and alien abduction stories, made the most of the wire theory.
Answering media inquiries about his "mysterious bulge", President Bush identified it as "my spine."
Meanwhile, at press time, Brooker's calling all assassins story was still being carried by the Guardian and Drudge Report.
Canada Free Press founding editor Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the media. A former Toronto Sun and Kingston Whig Standard columnist, she has also appeared on Newsmax.com, the Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and World Net Daily. Judi can be reached at: cfp@canadafreepress.com.
If he is a Democrat, than he thinks the electorate is too stupid to know there are newspapers printed outside of the US. Hell, this is the same paper trying to get Kerry elected via Clark County, Ohio letter-writing campaign, so I'm sure he's pretty freaked that Kerry is going to get tarred by this (and rightfully so).
I wouldn't be surprised if that "bulge" was a bullet-proof vest knowing how crazy some of those dims are. I liked Bush's answer to the question saying it was his spine....something kerry lacks.
LOL!
He kills me.
Thanks for posting the law, but I do not see where Drudge has done any wrong.
It's less a question of political affiliations, and more about Free Republic history. Google up Mr. Thompson and the Free Republic, and your eyes will be opened. ;-)
Sounds more like this "attorney" has a thing against Drudge rather than any concern about the President.
I think they're pissed that nobody from the Democrats can keep a secret. They're just pissed they were exposed by Drudge. Now they have to try to cover it up. Who wants to take a wager that they're calling on some VVAW buddies to hush this and file it with the Dishonorable Discharge.
They would love to take one of the NM conservative sites and discredit it.
The old misdirection ploy.
Ya think? ;-)
Lol nice nick.....
There may not be enough room for everyone that desires freedom here on the continental US, but there's always enough room for another star on our flag.
Did it ever occur to anyone that Matt(as much as we like him) might have added to the potential danger in having that particular wording posted in red on his website?
He has been guilty in the past of posting information that could potentially cause harm to the Bush family i.e. a fairly complete itinerary of Bush daughter last summer when she was out of the country. As I recall, he had a photo of her and in the background was the road sign. Then he had the exact time she was expected to arrive at a particular location. I thought at the time it was very poor judgment. I don't think it has been intentional, but it can give the loonies ideas.
Responsibility is part of journalism, not passing the buck.
HAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think it was his headline. If he'd just liked the story, I think he would have been okay but his headline was inflammatory.
You are incorrect.
In your theory, any news that is a threat to democracy or our government is "too risky" and shouldn't be allowed into the public arena. So, to continue in that vein, I guess FNC and CNN shouldn't repeat this information about the very newspaper that tried to interfere in our electoral process by electioneering Ohio voters??
Well, in that case, I call censorship. Alec Baldwin made threats to Henry Hyde's family on American television and nobody batted an eye.
If the few can't handle the responsibility of being in a democracy and have trouble 'understanding' English, then we have a broken cog in the natural selection wheel, my friend.
Aw, come on, he's responsible for choosing the words in the headline. I feel certain that he will understand that. You can't always pass the blame off on someone else. Blaming others is just a smoke screen to cover your own butt. It also lets people know what kind of character you have by the way in which you handle the criticism. After all, not everyone has to play the smoke screen game just 'cause the Democraps do.
Mmmmmm. "I see" said the blind man...
Here's a good example of what you say:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/779685/posts
Thanks!
Finally, a voice of reason. I think you hit the nail on the head!
Did you log into FR by mistake? You sound just like a democrat! Excusus, excuses, accept no responsibility. That gets old.
Sorry, I don't follow you. Care to elaborate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.