Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Student interrogated and suspend for wearing Halloween costume (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   
Author Topic: Student interrogated and suspend for wearing Halloween costume
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
Except that it wasn't Halloween. Heck, there are still more than two weeks to go till we get there.

To be fair, where I live Halloween season begins 6 weeks before, with costumes on streets beginning well before the 31st. And of course Christmas seasons begins on Nov 1 [Smile]
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The internet and media are pretty fickle about what gets escalated, and it does indeed depend on context that will get people riled up.

Not really. It gets riled up about what people make an effort to get it riled up about. The issues that come to attention aren't picked, the're promoted.


quote:
Given the lack of national interest, I find it curious how we're even talking about this in our forum, which seems the more interesting question at least to me. I've hunted quite a bit, and I can't find a mention outside of the local area including retweets, etc.

Because someone here pulled it in as a concern troll. How better to distract from any of the real underlying issues than to blow a localized incident out of proportion and pretend that people can't have legitimate concerns about the one if they aren't coming the world for every other issue and paying equal attention to those as well?

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fenring:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
Except that it wasn't Halloween. Heck, there are still more than two weeks to go till we get there.

To be fair, where I live Halloween season begins 6 weeks before, with costumes on streets beginning well before the 31st. And of course Christmas seasons begins on Nov 1 [Smile]
You're lucky. Christmas kicked up a month an a half ago in my neck of the woods.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And I have already said that Achmed's story becomes plausible in light of the facts about soldering and the shop class (I trust sci-fi more that Tom).
Those facts were available from the start. That you only glommed onto them after having accused him of being a liar is *very* telling about how people have formed opinions in this discussion, both here on Ornery and IRL.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
quote:
And I have already said that Achmed's story becomes plausible in light of the facts about soldering and the shop class (I trust sci-fi more that Tom).
Those facts were available from the start. That you only glommed onto them after having accused him of being a liar is *very* telling about how people have formed opinions in this discussion, both here on Ornery and IRL.
What facts? I'd like my question answered about where this "shop class" notion came from, because I never read anywhere that he made the thing for a class project; Ahmed never said this as far as I can tell, and a Google search comes up with nothing concrete suggesting this.

I've seen a few blogs and articles that randomly mention with no source that he made it as a class project, but this would seem to be an untruth meant to make the outrage against Ahmed greater; e.g. 'he did his project like he was told and then was punished for it', which sounds worse than 'he randomly made a weird thing and brought it to school'.

That you will accept any point whatsoever that paints Ahmed as a victim of prejudice, true or not, is *very* telling about how people have formed opinions in this discussion, both here on Ornery and IRL.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sigh, I didn't say it was a class project. I've only said what Ahmed himself has said. He likes to make stuff. He brought it in to show his teacher. It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts. Those are facts. I have no idea where Pete got the idea that it was made either in or for a shop class. If you stick to what the girl said about her Halloween costume, it would be fair to take Ahmed at his word, too. Digging for suggestive comments and projecting your own speculation because you were once a mischievous boy says more about you than about Ahmed.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, we're on the same page then. But just to be clear, you quoted Pete talking about "the facts about soldering and the shop class" and responded by saying "Those facts were available from the start." Since the idea about the shop class is the only relevant point in Pete's text that he says makes Ahmed's story more plausible, it seemed like you were backing up his notion that it was a class project (which it wasn't). But ok, I get it.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
Sigh, I didn't say it was a class project. I've only said what Ahmed himself has said. He likes to make stuff. He brought it in to show his teacher. It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts. Those are facts.

I think you're confused about what a fact is. It is a fact that he said these things (I presume that based on your statement), it is not necessarily a fact that these things are independently true.

"He likes to make stuff," only he would know this, no reason to doubt it and the circumstantial evidence appears to confirm it.

"He brought it to show his teacher," He brought it and showed it to his teacher - that is a fact. Whether he did it for that purpose is a claim that may or may not be a fact.

"It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts." Not an expert on this one, I was given to understand that the parts came from a single clock, not that they were cobbled together. Is that inaccurate? Can you specifically confirm if this was an overstatement on your part?
quote:
I have no idea where Pete got the idea that it was made either in or for a shop class. If you stick to what the girl said about her Halloween costume, it would be fair to take Ahmed at his word, too.
Why? Seriously, why would it be fair to take people at their word in completely different contexts where their immediate reactions and those of their families appear to be completely different? Do you have a rational basis for this?
quote:
Digging for suggestive comments and projecting your own speculation because you were once a mischievous boy says more about you than about Ahmed.
That's true. Everyone's speculation, your's included, says a lot more about you than about Ahmed. It's impossible for that not to be the case when someone is speculating. That's why the best arguments are about cases where there are not enough details.
Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Seriously, why would it be fair to take people at their word in completely different contexts where their immediate reactions and those of their families appear to be completely different? Do you have a rational basis for this
Because that's be bare minimum respect that should be afforded any person without clear and compelling evidence otherwise.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think you're confused about what a fact is. It is a fact that he said these things (I presume that based on your statement), it is not necessarily a fact that these things are independently true.
No, I'm not at all confused. You are willing to ignore his statements of fact and claim that they are suspect. However, there are no facts to prove that, only supposition, speculation and interpolation.
quote:
"It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts." Not an expert on this one, I was given to understand that the parts came from a single clock, not that they were cobbled together. Is that inaccurate? Can you specifically confirm if this was an overstatement on your part?
I watched an interview he gave to Larry Wilmore where said that.

You and others should focus on what the boy said, not on what you heard someone who heard that he might have done something at some other time that would suggest the possibility that he might have done something other than what he said he did and why he did it.

If you can't bring yourself to do that, I think the girl in the gas mask should be arrested because *I* think she might have been trying to carry out an attack on the school, and my facts are no less shaky than the ones you are conjuring up to imply that Ahmed is anything other than what he represents about himself.

The unwillingness to accept what the boy says about himself is disturbing, but it is of a pattern that has been repeated many times.

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The problem with that is if the kid, hypothetically, was trying to be a wise-***, then there's a 100% chance he wouldn't say so and would tell another story instead. I, for one, know better than to believe any old thing a 14 year old says. That doesn't mean I discount it either, but you take it with a grain of salt and double check the story with another adult.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I have no idea where Pete got the idea that it was made either in or for a shop class"

I didn't, Someone on this thread claimed that Ahmed had done some welding on the piece, and brought it to school to show his shop teacher, I said those facts, if true, make his story very plausible, in that case Ahmed is more blameless than the Halloween girl. Nevertheless I think the police acted correctly in both cases. You bring in anything to the airport or school that looks like a bomb, without prior authorization in writing, you can expect to wind up in handcuffs. That's just the post columbine world we live in.

As for believing, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the teller, but here I got the story via third parties and am not sure what his actual story was. I can't give the benefit of the doubt when a story doesn't on its face make sense. For example, if you tell me a blue whale tried to mate with a submarine, I might believe you, but not if you say the blue whale *successfully* mated with the sub.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
". It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts. Those are facts"

If those are facts, they are facts that flatly contradict the conservative news articles I read, and.additionally not presented in the more liberal articles I saw in the kid's defense. If what you said is true, then I agree it would only be fair or reasonable to assume achmed is telling the truth.

It's clearly stupid and malicious to make this an issue about ached or about one's fellow ornerian's. It"s simply about the facts.

As for the purported injustice of believing the girl and not Acmed, that's an idiotic juxtaposition because she doesn't claim pure innocence as Ached does.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As a side note, do you think Barry met with Achmed without having his bodyguards thoroughly search him? Was that "racism"? Traumatizing?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh, isn't everyone screened or searched at the WH? Why would that be anything other than routine?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(Pete, his name is Ahmed, not Achmed.)
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The problem with that is if the kid, hypothetically, was trying to be a wise-***, then there's a 100% chance he wouldn't say so and would tell another story instead.
This, of course, is the essential element that all conspiracy theories depend on. The facts can't be trusted, so we have to go looking for facts not presented to frame a more satisfying narrative. The new narrative doesn't even have to disprove the original one, just be plausible enough to sow doubt. Once doubt is established, it becomes the foundation for an alternative belief or better yet, it becomes the basis for disbelieving the boy without requiring anyone to believe the alternative narrative. Besides people labeling him a moron, dullard or hoaxster, Ahmed has also been called a budding criminal mastermind. Nobody can prove they're wrong.

[ October 15, 2015, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
quote:
I think you're confused about what a fact is. It is a fact that he said these things (I presume that based on your statement), it is not necessarily a fact that these things are independently true.
No, I'm not at all confused. You are willing to ignore his statements of fact and claim that they are suspect.
Thank you for demonstrating that you do not in fact understand the difference between a fact and a claim.
quote:
quote:
"It was a clock cobbled together from new and scavenged parts." Not an expert on this one, I was given to understand that the parts came from a single clock, not that they were cobbled together. Is that inaccurate? Can you specifically confirm if this was an overstatement on your part?
I watched an interview he gave to Larry Wilmore where said that.
I see. Whether the parts came from a single clock is objectively verifiable is it not? Why would you claim a statement about it by an interested party is a fact?
quote:
You and others should focus on what the boy said, not on what you heard someone who heard that he might have done something at some other time that would suggest the possibility that he might have done something other than what he said he did and why he did it.
I'm definitely not doing the latter, lol. Is that your issue? You're convinced we're taking the statements of other people at face value? Nothings further from the truth. There is a VERY limited set of facts here, and they don't include any motivations by any of the parties involved.

There are very plausible alternatives for what each party claims there motivation was, and in the case of Ahmed, some of the alternatives are more plausible than what he said. That doesn't however, mean that we have to use a rule of assumption (like Occam's razor) here, but it does mean it would be silly to make a conclusion about one story or the other without more evidence (which we're not going to get).

I mean honest to goodness, you yourself repeatedly cited to the hostility of the local mayor as somehow relevant to the interpretation of the event, if anyone is getting carried away by relying on outside voices it's you.

Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Whether the parts came from a single clock is objectively verifiable is it not?
Indeed. Since at least one part came from a pencil case, it's extremely verifiable that there were at lest two different things cobbled together to make the clock, not simply one clock taken apart and put back together.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
You bring in anything to the airport or school that looks like a bomb, without prior authorization in writing, you can expect to wind up in handcuffs.
Except, of course, that it didn't look like a bomb- that was just the nominal excuse used to justify harassment despite the fact that the process used didn't even remotely resemble what would have happened if someone did think it looked like a bomb.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"didn't look like a bomb" is a misleading statement. Those more in the know realize that the movie bomb with LED display and blinking lights does not resemble a typical "real bomb".

It does however "look like a movie bomb". If you refuse to accept that, or intentionally avoid it, then discussion on the topic is pretty much useless. (You don't have to accept that was the intention of Ahmed, just that this is the result of his project.)

Pyrtolin you are correct that the most telling aspect of the story was the failure to treat the object as a threat yet treat it as an illegal act. This is where the story breaks down into either policy or punitive action.

If the policy is to call the police in on any alleged bomb hoax as a potential criminal act in itself, then the staff and even the police may have done nothing wrong. As you said, none of the staff seemed to entertain that the object was a legitimate threat to anything other than disrupting the school day.

[ October 15, 2015, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
You bring in anything to the airport or school that looks like a bomb, without prior authorization in writing, you can expect to wind up in handcuffs.
Except, of course, that it didn't look like a bomb- that was just the nominal excuse used to justify harassment despite the fact that the process used didn't even remotely resemble what would have happened if someone did think it looked like a bomb.
This is your opinion, not a fact. It's not a fact because in the opinions of many people it was plenty bomb-ish.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
This is your opinion, not a fact. It's not a fact because in the opinions of many people it was plenty bomb-ish.
PLenty of people don't matter, only those with the responsibility of being able to tell a bomb from not a bomb. And none of those people actually reacted like it was a bomb. It's only the people who were told first that it was suggested that it looked like a bomb then were shown it later that have been consistently insisting that it looked like a bomb. Even the teacher that saw it, privately, after class, then confiscated it, held it through the day until he decided to call the police in to hassle Ahmed very obviously didn't think it looked like a bomb or he would have reacted much differently.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
It does however "look like a movie bomb". If you refuse to accept that, or intentionally avoid it, then discussion on the topic is pretty much useless. (You don't have to accept that was the intention of Ahmed, just that this is the result of his project.)


If it looks like a movie bomb, then it does not look like a bomb for any serious purposes. IT would be one thing if it had been presented in a way to try to use its prop resemblance to actually fool people, but it was carefully kept out of the sight of anyone that might make that mistake, never mine being presented to trick anyone.

quote:
If the policy is to call the police in on any alleged bomb hoax as a potential criminal act in itself, then the staff and even the police may have done nothing wrong. As you said, none of the staff seemed to entertain that the object was a legitimate threat to anything other than disrupting the school day.
Which means there was no bomb hoax, to the issue is moot. Following the procedure for a bomb hoax when none was attempted is misuse of power.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
1. Suspicious device that is a potential threat.
2. Suspicious device that is not a threat but may have been designed to appear threatening
3. Suspicious device that is a potential threat accompanied by a verbal or written threat.
4. Suspicious device that is not a threat but may have been designed to appear threatening and accompanied by a verbal or written threat.
5. A verbal or written threat without an observable device.

All of these would, I’d imagine, have different policy responses set up. I’m suggesting this MAY HAVE BEEN #2 and they were “going by the book”.

Apologies for dragging this out in this... sub thread? of the other discussion.

[ October 15, 2015, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
stilesbn
Member
Member # 6842

 - posted      Profile for stilesbn   Email stilesbn       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My question is did the girl ever say "Are you my mummy?"

Why hasn't anyone asked this extremely important question?

Posts: 174 | Registered: Jul 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
None of them apply, because the device was not suspicious; its function was very clear.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/the-empty-child-mummy.jpg

Important indeed.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
Which means there was no bomb hoax, to the issue is moot. Following the procedure for a bomb hoax when none was attempted is misuse of power.

You and a few others are the ones pushing the false narrative of "bomb hoax", which something no one has suggested (which I think I've mentioned around 10 times already). Zero people have claimed that it looked close enough to a real bomb to be considered a threat. Your repeated attempt to defeat this non-point is - may I borrow your term? - disingenuous.

it is 100% totally irrelevant whether, upon inspection, the device was determined to be passable as a bomb or not. Looking even slightly bomb-ish is more than enough for authorities to get involved. The fact of it being a fake-type Hollywood bomb has no more legal traction than if someone brought in a Hollywood-type fake blaster rifle or other kind of fake gun. That is a serious legal matter, period. Don't you remember finger-gun kid? Granted, that was outrageous, but that is the stupid world we live in now. Do I like the laws and policies in place now? No. But I'm not in charge and don't get to decide what is and isn't a police matter. DW and I are both unsure about whether handcuffs were appropriate, but that has no bearing on whether the school was obliged to contact authorities about a potential bomb prop. Not a bomb hoax! A bomb prop/joke/facsimile/whatever.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think you're wrong about that, Fenring. I think the only reason to call the police was if they suspected it was a hoax. I think that was actually the official narrative.
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He was arrested on suspicion of a bomb hoax. That was the rationale.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Seriati,
quote:
Thank you for demonstrating that you do not in fact understand the difference between a fact and a claim.
Let's try this, ok? Here's the definition of a fact and a claim:
quote:
Fact: a truth known by actual experience or observation

Claim: an assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt.

You are making a claim that Ahmed's statement of fact is possibly in error, yet you have no evidence to back up your claim. The burden on you is to prove that he is lying, or you can just idly claim that maybe he is, despite lacking any evidence.

The rest of your post is ignorable given your failure to understand that difference, but I'll comment on:
quote:
I mean honest to goodness, you yourself repeatedly cited to the hostility of the local mayor as somehow relevant to the interpretation of the event, if anyone is getting carried away by relying on outside voices it's you.
The claim that the mayor's xenophobic attitude toward sharia influences the school's administration and police is reasonable, given her wide support in the community and her repeated election to the Mayor's office. I don't have evidence to prove that claim, but have enough to present it into the discussion as a potential influence and reflection on the community.

DW,
quote:
1. Suspicious device that is a potential threat.
2. Suspicious device that is not a threat but may have been designed to appear threatening
3. Suspicious device that is a potential threat accompanied by a verbal or written threat.
4. Suspicious device that is not a threat but may have been designed to appear threatening and accompanied by a verbal or written threat.
5. A verbal or written threat without an observable device.

How many of those could be applied to a person wearing a gas mask in a school building?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/the-empty-child-mummy.jpg

Important indeed.

The proper response by the authorities to someone dressed like that would be (of course), "I'm very, very cross with you. Go to your room!" [Smile]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
He was arrested on suspicion of a bomb hoax. That was the rationale.

Well, yes. As far as I know I don't think we're discussing whether or not the school's stated reason for calling the police was reasonable, but rather whether it was reasonable to call the police regardless of the reason they stated. If the school called it a bomb hoax, and it was actually not that but was rather a 'bomb joke' then while this would show their reasoning is faulty (I am not particularly interested in defending the school's rationale, as it happens) it might still be the case that alternative reasoning would still warrant the 9-11 call. After all, a 9-11 call doesn't have to result in an arrest. The police could show up and say "this really isn't a big deal" or "we understand your concern but no crime was actually committed." That happens all the time, and ideally a town with a reasonable police force would have a good communicative rapport with the schools there to deal with parsing various student behaviors in order to separate kid-stuff from more serious stuff.

I'm saying that no one here is saying it was a legitimate bomb hoax. Various people here refuting that it was a bomb hoax may be an attempt to make the school look bad, but it doesn't address the discussion here at all. At worst some of us are saying that it was a joke or prank, and in general I think the main thrust is to question the narrative of Ahmed as a victim of Islamophobia rather than to make definitive statements about matters that - as Seriati mentioned - we don't really know for sure.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
quote:
Claim: an assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt.
You are making a claim that Ahmed's statement of fact is possibly in error,
What statement of fact? He made the claim, I'm just acknowledging that it is a claim. You misidentified each of his claims as a fact.
quote:
...yet you have no evidence to back up your claim.
What evidence is needed to point out that something is not a fact? Seriously, you want me to provide evidence that someone's motivation is personal and that there is no direct way to measure it?
quote:
The burden on you is to prove that he is lying, or you can just idly claim that maybe he is, despite lacking any evidence.
Why's there a burden to do this? Did I make a claim about what happened that I need to prove? Please point it out for me.

Seriously, you've dug yourself into a hole here. As far as I can tell, you're the only one who seems to be making claims as to fact and you don't have any real evidence to support it, other than a blind willingness to accept the self-interested words of a 14 year old who got caught without any critical thought. Sure it's a possibility he's been 100% truthful about everything (and unrealistically a possibility that not a single part of his internal justification for anything involved has changed over time - it would be inhuman not to incorporate current knowledge into the memory of your prior motivations, but who knows). But there are a lot of other possibilities, several of which (prank, intentional act that got out of hand) that make as much, if not more, sense.
quote:
The rest of your post is ignorable given your failure to understand that difference,...
Ignore away, because I don't see what you said as a reasonable response anyway.
quote:
but I'll comment on:
quote:
I mean honest to goodness, you yourself repeatedly cited to the hostility of the local mayor as somehow relevant to the interpretation of the event, if anyone is getting carried away by relying on outside voices it's you.
The claim that the mayor's xenophobic attitude toward sharia influences the school's administration and police is reasonable, given her wide support in the community and her repeated election to the Mayor's office.
It's not reasonable. I doubt many towns exist where the mayor's opinion has a great influence over a school board, let alone over a specific group of teachers. There is certainly nothing about it that would be relevant that is not pure unfounded speculation and implication on your part, that's beyond anything you are actively criticizing here.
quote:
I don't have evidence to prove that claim, but have enough to present it into the discussion as a potential influence and reflection on the community.
You have less reason to present it than others do to present that this could have been a prank.
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Whether the parts came from a single clock is objectively verifiable is it not?
Indeed. Since at least one part came from a pencil case, it's extremely verifiable that there were at lest two different things cobbled together to make the clock, not simply one clock taken apart and put back together.
Lol. Unless there were parts from two or more clocks or from another electronic or mechanical device, the point you are making is pretty childish. We all know he put it in a pencil box, what we don't know is whether he reassembled a single clock in the box, or actually cobbled together a mix of "new and scavenged parts" in doing so. I honestly don't care, it's not terribly material to the act itself (ie bringing it to school), but for the statement to be true as presented you need something more than the addition of the pencil box.
Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Item 1 and maybe item 2 AI.
Or should I say, "Objection. Council is leading the witness." [Razz]
Feel free to ask your real question if you want.

Fenring,
quote:
At worst some of us are saying that it was a joke or prank,
At worst, or IMO worse than both of these, I and others entertained the idea that this could be some sort of orchestrated publicity stunt / protest. Which aligns with the "put him back in cuffs so we can take a pic" allegation. I see it as unlikely, but it's a bit more serious an accusation than a joke or prank.

That last bit, is also what makes the gas mask incident different. If that sneaking suspicion or accusation of Islamophobia wasn't present, this is not worth the mention. Kids do dumb **** all the time and the schools suspend them for it. If it doesn't fit into an on going national debate or potential media sensationalism, it goes largely unnoticed.

[ October 15, 2015, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Unless there were parts from two or more clocks or from another electronic or mechanical device, the point you are making is pretty childish. We all know he put it in a pencil box, what we don't know is whether he reassembled a single clock in the box, or actually cobbled together a mix of "new and scavenged parts" in doing so. I honestly don't care, it's not terribly material to the act itself (ie bringing it to school), but for the statement to be true as presented you need something more than the addition of the pencil box.
You obviously do care, otherwise you wouldn't keep pedantically moving the goalposts around just to score a technical viroty of being right on a point that's otherwise irrelevant. He cobbled some things together to make a clock End of story. IF the old clock had been sitting in a box in the garage because no one was using it at the time, that certainly counts as scavenged. It's clear that you don't consider that much to speak of, but I'm not sure why you're so bent on making sure that everyone else similarly tries to marginalize him on this particular point.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Elements of the story thus far.

1A. Ahmed is a gifted tinkerer.
1B. Ahmed is just someone who took apart a clock and threw it in a case which takes little to know technical / mechanical skill.
1C. Ahmed is a pawn in his father's activism who's intent is to embarrass the community (or nation?) for jumping to, what unfortunately are now predictable, conclusions.

2A. Any passing resemblance the clock has to a bomb is unreasonable and paranoid.
2B. The clock looks so much like a bomb that it is unreasonable and dishonest to believe it is a coincidence.
3C. The prop was designed to look enough like a bomb to provoke a reaction yet obviously not dangerous as to avoid dangerous reactions.

3A. This is a clear example of Islamophobia and the national attention and White House attention was a necessary step to send a message that it will not be tolerated.
3B. There are enough questions and oddities to the story that, while the media should have looked into this the WH press secretary should be fired and probably flogged for letting the President get involved.
3C. We all got played.

That about sum up the options? I couldn't wrap my head around the "who cares if he MADE A CLOCK or not" until I lined them all up like that.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not trying to marginalize him on any point Pyrtolin, I said earlier on that he could be proud of it even it was just a rehoming. My objection, to which you responded, was to Al Wessex's statement of "facts," about the situation, nothing more or less.
Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1