Dallas Obama Rally: Secret Service Doesn't Screen for Weapons
Dallas police officers were surprised when the Secret Service called a halt to screening people for weapons over an hour before Sen. Barack Obama went onstage for a rally at Reunion Arena.
A deputy police chief said the Secret Service apparently gave the order to help speed people into the rally. He said he was concerned but that the 17,000 people estimated to have shown up looked like "a friendly crowd."
A policeman who spoke anonymously said he and fellow officers were worried at how many people were at the arena without having been screened. "How can you not worry in this day and age?" he asked.
Does this ever happen to any candidates? I have a hard time imagining slacker minimum wagers getting away with such a thing, let alone the secret service. I would assume checking every single square foot of the building would be standard protocol for them.
This HAS to be deliberate. As stated above, to screen every inch and possible threat from the person they're trying to protect is the entirety of their job. Not an aspect, not a favor, IT'S THEIR EFFING JOB!!
It'd be really great to have a follow-up on this story. As a DFW resident, I followed the local news on the rally with moderate interest.
To be completely honest, I'm not terribly surprised about the lack of security. I hate to digress this far, but this whole sense of security in the U.S. - in this day and age - seems to be arguably false, anyway.
Let's get our s*** together, guys and gals - regardless your political, ethnic, or religious affiliation.
A man who can mesmerize the masses, talking of standing up to organized money, to lobbyists, special interests, but his whole political apparatus is made of members of the same globalist organizations that most of Bush`s administration is made up of, except this time the stated agenda is CHANGE & YES WE CAN. Makes ya think.
If these people fooled most to get Bush elected I'm sure they'll do the same the next time around.
but I hate posting a follow-up as the first summary on a new issue on SN. Predictably, the Secret Service has busted out a watusi of defensiveness. But come on guys, you don't escort a black Presidential candidate into Assassination City, not provide stringent security, and then not expect an outcry.
I think I understand your argument, but really in context to the story you've posted in, makes no sense whatsoever.
If Obama and Bush's interests are one in the same, then what does have to with their personal security? I can certainly tell you that both Bush and Cheney would never allow a single soul into a public speech, rally, or anything else in the US without being searched, likewise with the perimeter (you can't even take water in with you, or many types of jewelry).
I'm pretty sure the Secret Service knows what they are doing. Also, the comment about JFK? Just because someone was killed in Dallas 40 years ago doesn't mean it's going to happen today. Also, nothing happened. I guess the Secret Service, that has a lot more experience with these rallys than any police chief, knew what they were talking about when they said it was a friendly crowd.
Shoot, at Bush rallies, you couldn't get in if you had an anti-Bush T-shirt on. Plus, the campaign instructed rally organizers how to block out protesters, and people were sometimes asked to sign an affadavit swearing their support of Bush before they were allowed in.
I've attended an event at Reunion Arena -- an FC Dallas soccer game -- and everyone's bags and coolers were checked. So the MLS is more worried about someone shooting up a soccer game than the Secret Service is about protecting a man who could be the next president.
When I was younger I attended and worked at Valley Forge Military Academy in PA. I worked as a waiter in the reception building on the campus. It was used for all sorts of formal events: Weddings, Orientations for prospective students, and the like.
One weekend, Dick Cheney was scheduled to speak the all Senior Officers of our Corps. I was serving the event, and for three hours they did a thorough search of anybody even going to be near the building. They sniffed everybody, even the staff down with dogs and asked everybody a few simple questions.
This was back in early 2001, near the end of the school year. Even before the political, social, and economic impacts of 9/11.
I don't see how this could happen if it wasn't an order. You just don't assume that somebody is "friendly."
When Bush mentions the word "terrorist" or when the FBI says something bad might happen, the Libs and Dems begin cajoling about how we're all being leashed by fear.
HOWEVER... When a Dem or Lib is left ungarded, all the "leash of fear" speak is replaced with, "but what if someone tries to attack him?"
I think most SN Libs feel comfortable with increased security at large public events. We just don't like warrantless wiretapping, torturing terrorism suspects, etc.
@qwerty: If that statement you made wasn't sarcastic, you're a f***ing moron. Also, the plural of rally is rallies... -.-
@hutchins: Just because you disagree with who a person is and their lack of real policies doesn't mean their lives should be jeopardized by the people who are paid to protect it.
@CArnold: Grow up. If you were a humanitarian (a good person) you'd probably agree with more liberal views, and actually understand why so many people resent the fact that bush is in office right now. Instead, you're a lowlife, selfish, prick conservative who's probably voting republican for the simple fact that you don't like democrats. (By the way, it's spelled U-N-G-U-A-R-D-E-D -- my f---ing seven year old cousin could tell you that.
By the way, I'm voting Paul. I dislike Obama like you people obviously do, but that doesn't mean the guy deserves to be shot.
It RAGES me when childish people incite arguments when there need not be any arguing, and their opinions are full of irrational gibbergabber slandering others. Thanks CA for reminding me why I hate most conservatives, I needed that.
Nothing happened which means the Secret Service knew what they were doing when they stopped screening. JFK was 40 years ago and had no bearing on this rally.
Also, thanks for the spelling lesson. It really changed the meaning of any part of what I said.
If you don't understand what I was calling you a f***ing moron for in the first place, you aren't going to get it if I explain it to you so I'll merely say our opinions differ and let it go.
Ok nevermind I couldn't just let it go.
INDIVIDUALS KILL PEOPLE. NOT CROWDS. Which omnipotent secret service agent saw a smile on EVERYONE'S FACE as they decided to stop the screening process? How does "looking friendly" tell anything's true intentions? Serial killers tend to seem friendly, but what do they do? Can you answer me that?
I don't care about something that happened 40 years ago, I care about this day and age and using rational lines of thought in your everyday processes. It's these people's job to ensure the safety of politicians and whoever. They did nothing to ensure his safety, they merely lucked out and he wasn't shot by some friendly looking prick who escaped screening.
Checkmate, you lose this debate sir, you're a f***ing moron.
Regardless of what stupid opinions may exist out there, what happened at that rally is a travesty, and I really hope that doesn't happen again.
>>If you don't understand what I was calling you a f:::ing moron for in the first place, you aren't going to get it if I explain it to you so I'll merely say our opinions differ and let it go. ::Ok. Fine with me. >>Ok nevermind I couldn't just let it go. ::Ok? >>INDIVIDUALS KILL PEOPLE. NOT CROWDS. Which omnipotent secret service agent saw a smile on EVERYONE'S FACE as they decided to stop the screening process? How does "looking friendly" tell anything's true intentions? Serial killers tend to seem friendly, but what do they do? Can you answer me that? :: Whoops sorry. Turns out it was the police chief that said they were friendly crowds, not the Secret Service. Now back to the statement at hand. True, individuals do kill people. Crowds also kill people but I understand what you are getting at. You are saying that some lone suicidal individual could have managed to get by every security measure at the rally up until the metal detector. At which point they would have been found out and arrested. Sorry to diabuse you of this notion but the metal detector is not a magic wand. It is just one more piece in a security system. Anyone with some no-how could get past one. That is why the last line of defense is not the metal detectors, it is the Secret Service with the candidate. Yet again, since you didn't catch it last time, the Secret Service knows what they are doing. >>I don't care about something that happened 40 years ago, I care about this day and age and using rational lines of thought in your everyday processes. It's these people's job to ensure the safety of politicians and whoever. They did nothing to ensure his safety, they merely lucked out and he wasn't shot by some friendly looking prick who escaped screening. ::Wrong. According to the news source as well as this one (http://www.breitbart.com/... show that the Secret Service already had a plan in place when they initially started letting people through the doors. These plans were decided by the "omnipotent" Secret Service as well as the local police department before being signed off by Obamas people (Read below why I think Obamas people were involved). They didn't deviate from this plan at all. >>Checkmate, you lose this debate sir, you're a f;;;ing moron. ::Ummm... no? You are? You seem to not have read the source or any other news articles pertaining to this incident and just decided that the Secret Service must have done something wrong. Sorry to prove you wrong but they didn't. They followed a plan put together by the Secret Service, Police, and (while I haven't been able to find a source that says so) most likely Obamas people as well. ::MY THOUGHTS ON OBAMAS PEOPLE ::The reason I say that Obamas people probably had a hand in drafting the security procedures is that it's Obamas Rally. They NEED Obamas cooperation if they are going to protect him. If only the Secret Service had a say, they would probably have put him behind bullet proof glass. Obama, and pretty much any other candidate, wouldn't allow that because then it seems that they are afraid of their supporters. Anything that the Secret Service decides would have to be signed on by Obamas people or else they stand the chance of losing his cooperation in helping them to protect him. >>Regardless of what stupid opinions may exist out there, what happened at that rally is a travesty, and I really hope that doesn't happen again. ::Nope. It wasn't It was planned to happen this way. Read the source. ::PS. I don't hate Obama. Don't hate any of the candidates. They are trying to get into a position that I could never succeed at. To be honest I don't really hate much of anything except people that argue without facts.
Wow. I doubt there is another potty-mouthed non-intellectual that could match your ability to convey a message as "eloquently" as your have. It serves your cause and party proudly, I'm sure.
> One thing Obama does need to worry about is keeping away from the assassin's bullet. It was just last week that the secret service ordered their agents to stop checking the crowd for weapons at a Dallas (!) Obama rally. this was much to the protest of the Dallas Police. > http://www.star-telegram.com/... > Who gave the order to stand down? The Secret Service. A federal agency. > Who are their bosses? Bush and Cheney. Why would they want to stop checking a crowd in Dallas for arms? > > Some speculate that since Bush has made it much easier to declare martial law, that some sort of incident involving Obama could trigger riots not unlike the ones after Dr. King's assassination. Bush could declare martial law and cancel the elections. Makes my tin foil hat tingle. >
