To be honest, it doesn’t even matter what type of math it was, threatening or otherwise. It’s a matter of basic common sense.
Let’s pretend, just for the sake of a silly hypothetical, that this guy was, in fact, doing the equations for the construction of an explosive device, or the equations to determine how big an explosion would be needed to destroy a plane.
What sort of terrorist plot is going to have the terrorist still doing the basic planning calculations while he’s sitting on the actual fucking plane that he’s supposed to be blowing up? What’s his next step going to be? Get the timer and the fertilizer and the gasoline out of his carry-on and start construction?
I mean, i guess it’s possible he’s one of those “Leave everything until the last second” types of terrorists, the kind who wrote all of his chemistry term papers the night before they were due and never sends his tax return in until close of business on April 15. But i’m betting that most terrorist attacks work out the logistics of blowing things up well before they actually blow things up. The 9/11 hijackers trained for months before carrying out their plot.
As a scary aside, a friend of a friend sold a couple of gym memberships to some of the DC-based 9/11 hijackers; when he tried to up-sell them into a longer membership, the story I heard was they weren’t interested.
It’s even more moronic than that.
Maybe doorhinge could help explain how writing on a piece of paper could ever be considered dangerous - regardless of whether it’s math or not!
Reminds me of Aliens:
Apone: I, uh… I want you to collect magazines from everybody.
Hudson: Is he fucking crazy?
Frost: What the hell are we supposed to use, man? Harsh language?
You don’t know what her side of the story is. You don’t know what her political affiliation is. She saw something, she said something. You follow Groupthink and consider her a moron.
The important part is that you don’t care what she heard or saw. You’ve decided that she’s a moron for having the audacity of following the Obama DHS’s guidelines of - If you see something, say something.
A woman travelling alone on a commercial flight becomes frightened. She notifies the aircrew of her concerns and leaves the aircraft. She’s not the first person who’s reported a suspicious person and she won’t be the last. But no one has referred to these other passengers as morons for notifying aircrews of their concerns. I suspect that ISIS thanks you for your efforts on their behalf.
Hahahaha. Is that what you hear? You’re a hoot. I don’t know what her side of the story is. Neither do you but I believe it’s important to hear her side before choosing to jump off the moron cliff with the rest of the lemmings. But why let getting all of the facts get in the way of a good witch burning.
What do terrorist normally do while they’re waiting to hijack a plane, or waiting for the plane to blown up? Do you have a terrorist handbook containing these tips that you could share with the rest of the class? Or with the TSA/DHS/CIA/FBI/BSA?
Maybe you could also pretend to know this woman’s side of the story? Oh wait, you already have. Damn woman, what a moron for being frightened. Couldn’t she just ask a man to supply her with her opinion? :rolleyes:
She saw a brown man doing math on an airplane and this made her scared. She reported it because she thought the brown man doing math must be doing something bad.
Actually, it is you who evidently do not care what her side of the story is. You’ve automatically–for no fathomable reason–decided that there must have been something nefarious being done by a completely innocent person for this woman you’re defending to have been so afraid that she refused to remain on the flight. You’re also either conveniently ignoring facts with your ludicrous assertion that nobody has referred to those other morons who’ve caused similar problems in the past–there has been at least one thread regarding such morons on this very site.
Your interpretation of the DHS guideline is also ludicrous. That guideline, for rational people, obviously means if you see something actually suspicious then you should say something to the appropriate authorities. It does not mean if you see some mathematical symbols that scared you in middle school, that you accuse someone of traveling while swarthy.
You can pretend all you like that you’re “just looking for more information” or that you’re “just asking questions”; however, the fact of the matter is that you’re JAQing off and doing an extremely poor job of it. Your so-called defense of this woman is, in reality, an attack on both the airlines and the authorities. More to the point, you’re essentially accusing the airline personnel of making up the story to demonize the woman in question. Okay, why would they do that? Why did they pick her? Your posts on this issue are rather asinine.
I think anyone except a moron understands that this guideline is not to be taken literally. One is not - as a good citizen and non-moron - expected or asked to say something if one sees literally “something” (in the sense of anything).
One is urged to say something if one sees something causing you to suspect a person is or may be going to commit an act of terrorism.
This woman would have shouted her reasonable explanation for her belief that the other passenger was or might be going to commit an act of terrorism from the rooftops by now if she had one. Your “we don’t know her side of the story” schtick is more a sort of desperate indefinite deferral strategy than a rebuttal.