British teenager banned from America for sending Barack Obama abusive email

reply to post by Myendica


then until they give a good reason for him being banned.... then all we have is what is being reported RIGHT?
and for what is being reported...is Stupid to ban someone.... Right, you have to agree with that.... anything else is conjecture...not Facts

Originally posted by tspark
reply to post by Myendica

 

then until they give a good reason for him being banned.... then all we have is what is being reported RIGHT?
and for what is being reported...is Stupid to ban someone.... Right, you have to agree with that.... anything else is conjecture...not Facts

did your read mid to bottom of page 2?

1st. JBA2848

where I then tried to make sense of the end of that quote he provided.

2nd. Myendica

But none of that matters if this next post was correct.

3rd. Irish Matador

enjoy

reply to post by Myendica

On Friday, Luke Angel, 17, from Silsoe told Bedfordshire on Sunday that he had sent one email about a month ago.

I guess you noticed that its says On Friday then it says on Sunday and also says about a month ago.?

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by Myendica

 

On Friday, Luke Angel, 17, from Silsoe told Bedfordshire on Sunday that he had sent one email about a month ago.

I guess you noticed that its says On Friday then it says on Sunday and also says about a month ago.?

edit on 13-9-2010 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)

that doesnt even make any sense. you read these news agencies?


so he sent more than 1? good for him.. nonetheless, he implied he was pretty abusive in his message. hence banning.

So what? Whatever happened to freedom of speech? I thought politicians were servants of the people, not the other way round? Oh wait, thats a democracy Im thinking of...my bad.

Disgraceful....what's the point of the White House having a section for people to send their views in via email if they don't want to hear criticism?

Ridiculous.

I think the kid said something about 9/11 I read he had been watching a documentary about it and wrote something about it.

reply to post by Nonchalant


Politicians in the US are not servants of teens in the UK.

If the kid was threatening than there may be consequences to his actions. We don't know exactly what happened because The Sun article is lousy and anyone who would believe it as is, is not thinking clearly or just looking for another excuse to complain about the restrictions of government agenda. To base an opinion off of this one article is not even a rationale move, let alone a move for those who frequent a conspiracy site.

reply to post by Myendica


It seems to me that you are smugly assuming things and trying to convince everyone they are facts. It does not say what he specifically said. I can think of many things that are more abusive than calling someone a pr!ck that wouldn't warrant a life time ban from the US. Hell I don't think any words written in an email should constitute a ban from the US if in fact there is no cause for further concern. If when the British authorities checked him out and he was considered a threat then yeah, I don't see a problem with banning him but the facts as they are presented are he was on a drunken rant.

It's the small steps that you don't notice that are the biggest threat. By the time you notice where they have led you it is too late.

Is this the specific channel for communications to use?

www.whitehouse.gov...

I wouldn't be unhappy to be banned from the USA.

Originally posted by Irish MatadorNow the legal age to drink alcohol in England is 18.

That's not true.

As for the story, it's a stupid overreaction but really he brought it on himself.

The minimum age you can legally drink in the privacy of your own / your parents home in the UK is 5... Yes 5...
You can buy wine and beer in a bar at 16 if your eating and your with an adult, and you can but it from a shop if your 18

As for the freedom of speech thing, This was in the UK, we don't really have a concept of free speech in the same way as the US we have extremely tough libel laws, laws again inciting racial or religious hatred, and probably lots of others that I don't know about. If any of those laws were broken in this guys email I have no idea

Bush "welcomed" criticism? Talk about a total rewrite of recent history. I doubt that Bush ever paid any attention to criticism in his life, except from Big CIA Daddy.

Threatening the president, other public officials or their families is a Class D felony under federal law, punished by 5-10 years in prison, although the courts can 'enhance" that if they choose and double the sentence. It is investigated by the FBI and Secret Service.

For his own good, I would advise this boy never to try to come back to the U.S., and just be glad he was over there when he sent that email. It sounds like they would have arrested him if he had been over here.

reply to post by witness63


There are a lot of people that carry evil protest signs that need to be rounded up and carted off, if this is the case....

for more than the current President i would have to say....

They have it on video---or film...shouldn't be hard for the FBI to hunt them down....


This was a waste of money and time....

I guess the FBI doesn't have any other terrorist's hands that they need to hold, to give training and "build bombs" for.....

reply to post by LeftWingLarry

The minimum age for the purchase of alcohol is 18. People aged 16 or 17 may consume wine, beer or cider on licensed premises (pubs/bars/restaurants) with a table meal. In England & Wales, an adult must order

en.wikipedia.org...

As I wrote above, that is the minimum age for PURCHASING alcohol. This guy was drinking in a house while watching a documentary on 9/11
If your in a private house you can drink from the age of five 5... I'm sure you know this as it says it in the very article you linked to, you just choose not to add that bit of the wiki article to your quote

Originally posted by Gargamel
reply to post by Myendica

 

It seems to me that you are smugly assuming things and trying to convince everyone they are facts. It does not say what he specifically said. I can think of many things that are more abusive than calling someone a pr!ck that wouldn't warrant a life time ban from the US. Hell I don't think any words written in an email should constitute a ban from the US if in fact there is no cause for further concern. If when the British authorities checked him out and he was considered a threat then yeah, I don't see a problem with banning him but the facts as they are presented are he was on a drunken rant.

It's the small steps that you don't notice that are the biggest threat. By the time you notice where they have led you it is too late.

i dont care what you guys say or think, so long as you aren't including a reference to my name in it anywhere, including "in response to Myendica" therefore, I will impose my common sense on those who question my opinion. I am going to just say it.. If this is a true story, and that is all the information the "news" gives, and the kid is quoted saying he was more abusive than what was stated in the interview with the "news", than you aren't thinking if you think "prick" is what got him banned. PLEASE, JUST USE THAT BRAIN. Anyone.

Don't come into our country and bash our president.

Thanks.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
Don't come into our country and bash our president.

Thanks.

I don't think he was in the country....thus the email sent....

Also....there are plenty of americans that have had the very least thought or said the same... most likely worse...

in fact i've heard worse...