I don’t know, but I find BigT’s knowledge of bomb-making practices concerning.
I’m guessing the Incorporated Slacker.
Does it even matter?
Just so long as he doesn’t know how to take apart a clock, we’re OK.
It’s OK - they always stop when the counter gets down to 007.
Or when you cut the red wire. Or is it the blue wire?
You keep letting the principal off the hook; I have no idea why. The biggest fuck up of all was calling the cops.
But even so, you’re wrong that the kid fucked up. The kid behaved like a 14 year old. He gets to, because he’s like… 14 years old.
I’m sorry your bias makes you refuse to face the facts.
Pot, meet Kettle.
The “facts” seem to be a fluid and changeable thing in this matter.
Like what CNN reported as “facts”.
Really? Anyone still think that is a fact?
That doesn’t seem to be the story at all. Now.
One can only wonder and wait as this great tragedy plays out.
I’m not sure what your issue is with either of those two statements.
Care to elucidate us?
Different teachers. The second one is the English teacher who confiscated the thing.
do you have a link to teh actual article?
Thisappears to be the source article. I’m not sure which part is supposed to be non-factual, and I am assuming those are the wrong quotes or something.
Thanks - I found it after I requested the source (or I found what I assume he is reffering to) - and yeah - it was the english teacher that Ahmed is quoting there, not the Engineering teacher. **FXMastermind **appears to be trying to imply the first teacher that said “dont show it” is the one that got freaked.
Disingenuous at best.
You’re sorry, all right. But your actual apology is an insincere abortion of rhetoric.
In your analogy, I’m a fuckin beluga whale.
Are those really the only possibilities you can think of? That displays a paucity of imagination. I think the true answer is most likely:
- The student is not simply a tinkerer, never intended to make a bomb threat, but wanted to incite authorities to think that’s what he was doing, so he could surf a social-media wave of righteous progressive outrage.
Wow, so much wrong here. Did you only parachute into this thread just now? I mean, I did the same thing a few days ago, not reading the first couple pages, but I didn’t attempt to characterize the whole thread that I hadn’t read. I just responded to the last post.
(1) Plenty of Dopers have repeated this bit about “real bombs” not having timers, ad nauseam. Which is entirely beside the point, because most of us have only seen movie bombs, which do have them.
(2) No one, that I have seen, has argued that the school thought it was a real bomb. So this is a straw man.
(3) Other than a very recent crude troll, I don’t believe anyone has stated or implied that his father is a terrorist or is teaching his son to be a terrorist. So, another straw man. What I have said is that I think the father is a publicity hound and an agent provocateur who set up a publicity stunt that would allow his son to surf on a wave of social media outrage. How that got interpreted as “he’s a terrorist”, I can’t imagine.
(4) You are lying or mistaken about Ahmed’s representation of the clock. From the WaPo (emphases mine):
Please provide the cite for the English teacher *ordering *him to take it out. In the articles I read and quoted earlier, that is not what was stated–although a lot of people took it as an inference.
This, all of it–except that the kid may have (in concert with his father) acted pretty cleverly in provoking all the rest of it.
I missed this. The answer is “hell no”. SlackerInc is confused.
Confused? No, clearly he was using you as an appeal to authority; it was a way to say: “See, Princhester, who is reasonable, and I agree on this point, therefore I must be reasonable too.”
<King Arthur>You’re a looney.</KH>
No. In context, I thought it was clear that I was not imputing that view to Princhester, but simply saying “yes, as you suggest, this is the scenario I am arguing for”. If you would like to go back and look at the actual post and offer a suggestion as to how I could have worded it better, I’m open to that — but I think it was pretty clear at the time that I was not saying what you are claiming I was.
I have already noted that I don’t keep track of people’s screen names around here (with the admitted exceptions of Marley and Evil Captor, and even there it took some time for their monikers to sink in), so I was completely unaware that Princhester is apparently some kind of Grand Poohbah in these parts. Nor do I think you will have success if you endeavor to find other examples of my randomly citing other posters as expressing a viewpoint they have not in fact expressed or endorsed.