• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

#IStandWithAhmed (or Inventing While Muslim is a thing?)

angelo said:
bilby said:
It's almost never better to be safe than sorry.

Life is risky. Those who give up freedom in exchange for security neither find nor deserve either.

Terrorists are a minuscule risk. As a society, we currently suffer far more harm from fear of terrorists than from their actions.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the Lindt Cafe victims!
Click to expand...

The Lindt Cafe siege was nothing to do with terrorism. It was a nutter who was pissed off at the courts. As you would know if you cared more about facts than about Andrew Bolt's opinion.

But what the fuck - let's say, for the sake of argument, that these were victims of terrorism. That still make terrorism too small a risk to care about. Worrying about terrorism makes far less sense, statistically, than planning how you will spend your Division 1 Powerball winnings - you are about a hundred times more likely to win Div 1 of Powerball than you are to be killed by a terrorist.

Are you going to put a deposit down on a Ferrari?

Learn some mathematics. Your argument is pathetic.

Don't buy a caravan - it will get swallowed by a sinkhole. Think that's a ridiculous fear? Tell that to the guys at Rainbow Beach.

Do you really think that the sinkhole at Rainbow Beach is a powerful argument against owning a caravan? Because if you don't then you shouldn't say "Tell that to the Lindt Cafe victims!", because that is a FAR WORSE argument than the argumentum ad-sinkholeum for non-ownership of a mobile dwelling.
 
angelo said:
Loren Pechtel said:
whichphilosophy said:
TSwizzle said:
AthenaAwakened said:
Are All Terrorists Muslims? It’s Not Even Close

Overwhelmingly, those who have committed terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe aren’t Muslims. Let’s give that a moment to sink in.

Now, it’s not your fault if you aren’t aware of that fact. You can blame the media. (Yes, Sarah Palin and I actually agree on one thing: The mainstream media sucks.)

So here are some statistics for those interested. Let’s start with Europe. Want to guess what percent of the terrorist attacks there were committed by Muslims over the past five years? Wrong. That is, unless you said less than 2 percent.

...

An FBI study looking at terrorism committed on U.S. soil between 1980 and 2005 found that 94 percent of the terror attacks were committed by non-Muslims.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

LOL !! A puff piece written by a muslim. Dear oh dear.
Click to expand...

From FBI statistics

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05#terror_05sum
List of terrorist attacks and by whom are listed.

This article below relies on the above but I have seen others
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013...ttacks-on-u-s-soil-between-1970-and-2012.html
Click to expand...

The statement was "since 9/11". That listing doesn't really go far enough but I see 7 deaths--2 known to be Islamic and 5 unknown. Most of those terrorist attacks harmed nobody.
Click to expand...
What about the deaths prevented since 9/11 because of heightened security? How many wannabees have been arrested before they could do any harm!
Click to expand...

What about the larger number of deaths CAUSED since 9/11 because of heightened fear? Those extra deaths are spread out in time and space, so they don't make the news. But they are real; and there are more of them than deaths prevented by the TSA's security theatre.

It doesn't help that the 'security' mostly does fuck all except generate fear.

The only security that actually helps prevent terrorism is happening in secret; SIGINT and HUMINT might prevent terrorists from blowing up a nuke in Manhattan; Confiscating granny's nail file and baby's formula at the airport won't do a damn thing against such an attack.

This is what fear of terrorism does:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15043650/
People tend to fear dread risks, that is, low-probability, high-consequence events, such as the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001. If Americans avoided the dread risk of flying after the attack and instead drove some of the unflown miles, one would expect an increase in traffic fatalities. This hypothesis was tested by analyzing data from the U.S. Department of Transportation for the 3 months following September 11. The analysis suggests that the number of Americans who lost their lives on the road by avoiding the risk of flying was higher than the total number of passengers killed on the four fatal flights.
Click to expand...
My bold.

(Sorry, I couldn't find any links to tabloid opinion pieces, so you will have to accept an actual piece of scientific research).
 
Last edited:
1. It is pretty well established that the clock was not created or "invented" by the kid. It was a factory made clock that he just took apart.

2. He wasn't arrested because people thought it was a bomb. He was arrested because they thought it was a bomb hoax, which is illegal.

3. Once his intentions were understood, he was released.

4. This is not a Muslim thing, it never was. But it sure looks like people on both sides of the aisle have found a way to capitalize on religion and race.
 
Indeed. If you look at a photo of the thing.... I can see why somebody who isn't science literate such as an English teacher may think it suspicious and possibly a bomb or meant to look like a bomb (a bomb hoax). That he's muslim is unfortunate, and there may have been some Islamophobia at play... but the kid really should have known better than to put a clock in a briefcase like this. Why a briefcase? Why not a milk carton or something? It makes me suspicious of his intentions regardless of his religion.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Indeed. If you look at a photo of the thing.... I can see why somebody who isn't science literate such as an English teacher may think it suspicious and possibly a bomb or meant to look like a bomb (a bomb hoax). That he's muslim is unfortunate, and there may have been some Islamophobia at play... but the kid really should have known better than to put a clock in a briefcase like this. Why a briefcase? Why not a milk carton or something? It makes me suspicious of his intentions regardless of his religion.
Click to expand...

On amazon the pencil case in question is advertised as being "sturdy" and "Strong". Frankly, there is a reason cell phones aren't housed in milk carton cardboard. Portable electronics need more stability to protect their delicate components. At least this student was smart enough NOT to put his electronics in a milk carton. If he had, maybe all the stupidity insults coming from the authoritarian side of this discussion might have some merit.
 
AdamWho said:
1. It is pretty well established that the clock was not created or "invented" by the kid. It was a factory made clock that he just took apart.
Click to expand...
When I was his age, I invented a new desert which looked a bit like a rye bread sandwich but was made from brownies with whipped cream and peanut butter and chocolate syrup sandwiched in the middle. Frankly, the word "invented" has a broader meaning than this kid's critics would like us to believe.
2. He wasn't arrested because people thought it was a bomb. He was arrested because they thought it was a bomb hoax, which is illegal.
Click to expand...
And then they interrogated him without a lawyer or his parents present despite his requests for them which is also illegal.
3. Once his intentions were understood, he was released.
Click to expand...
And then he was suspended for three days despite acknowledging that there was no bomb threat or bomb hoax.
4. This is not a Muslim thing, it never was. But it sure looks like people on both sides of the aisle have found a way to capitalize on religion and race.
Click to expand...
When people start "capitalizing on religion and race" it becomes a "Muslim thing."
 
maxparrish said:
[4] Alarms don't go off "accidentally". He programmed the digital clock radio to sound an alarm in the middle of the day His supporters say he is creative, inventive and smart...right? So, then, why did this "genius" set it to start buzzing in the middle of the class?
Click to expand...
Ahmed's stories of what happened are muddled, so who knows what really happened.

Maybe he did plug it in, but then again, he took it to every class so the alarm going off at one of them isn't that unlikely. However this requires that he plugged it in during class, and maybe had a backup battery so the alarm and the time wouldn't be lost.

More likely, I think he just plugged it in when he showed it to the teacher(s), and the "alarm" was just beeping to tell that there is no battery or something else, and not an actual clock alarm.
 
zorq said:
2. He wasn't arrested because people thought it was a bomb. He was arrested because they thought it was a bomb hoax, which is illegal.
Click to expand...
And then they interrogated him without a lawyer or his parents present despite his requests for them which is also illegal.
Click to expand...
Source? I don't recall him asking for a lawyer or his parents, and according to the police chief while it is customary to call the parents, it's not illegal to talk to minors without their parents present.
 
My current theory which fits with facts best is following:
Ahmed and and his attention whore father planned to get school suspension only with this stunt. They made this hoax bomb and Ahmed went to school to troll teachers with it, first one (engineering or something) teacher did not fall for it telling the boy not to show it, so he had to bring it to following classes (we don't know how many), eventually he simply plugged it during english class and alarm went off. His father did not plan for police involvement but it all turned out even better than they had hoped. That DailyBeast article is the proof that that family are islamic version of kardashians. "15 minutes of fame" conversation tells you all need to know.
 
zorq said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Indeed. If you look at a photo of the thing.... I can see why somebody who isn't science literate such as an English teacher may think it suspicious and possibly a bomb or meant to look like a bomb (a bomb hoax). That he's muslim is unfortunate, and there may have been some Islamophobia at play... but the kid really should have known better than to put a clock in a briefcase like this. Why a briefcase? Why not a milk carton or something? It makes me suspicious of his intentions regardless of his religion.
Click to expand...

On amazon the pencil case in question is advertised as being "sturdy" and "Strong". Frankly, there is a reason cell phones aren't housed in milk carton cardboard. Portable electronics need more stability to protect their delicate components. At least this student was smart enough NOT to put his electronics in a milk carton. If he had, maybe all the stupidity insults coming from the authoritarian side of this discussion might have some merit.
Click to expand...

It was in a far more functional case to start with. The power supply was not exposed, the control buttons were attached and ergonomically designed, and perhaps most notably, the display was on the outside. Whatever this kid's intention was, it was certainly not to make a more functional clock than the one he started with. Or a more functional pencil case.
 
laughing dog said:
Malintent said:
Ya, that's about it. I agree with everything you wrote here, Max. What can we say... Kids these days are willfully stupid. Their freedom and rights will disappear like the vapor of their whole existence, called internet, by mob-ruled dodos.
Click to expand...
Whatever. That "willfully stupid" kid is making lots of adults look like addle-bated nimcompoops who appear afraid of their own shadows.
Click to expand...

Which of the millions of 'willfully stupid kids' that make up the internet society are you referring to? I think you missed the point entirely.
 
angelo said:
This episode has had much more publicity than it deserves.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think that anytime officials are suspected of abusing their authority it merits a closer look and discussion until either a satisfactory plan of action to address the abuse has been determined, or the suspicion is found to be unsubstantiated.

I've been thinking about how many of these threads play out. We start out discussing an incident and end up discussing the character of the victim. The weird part is, some of the posters attacking Ahmed on a personal level claim to support the rights of citizens in other threads. But again and again we see antipathy being used to justify apathy. People don't like the victim and somehow that makes it okay to not care that their rights are being violated. Well, if you support the civil rights of American citizens, then it doesn't really matter if an individual American is obnoxious, irritating, boastful, or otherwise unlikable. Their rights do not depend on you liking them. If they did, then they wouldn't be rights, they'd be privileges reserved for the popular members of the group in power.

So what if Ahmed used the word invention interchangeably with the words construction and assembly in an interview after the host used the word first? So what if he brought the thing to English class after another teacher told him to put it away? So what if you don't like him or his family? It doesn't matter one damn bit in this discussion.

We're talking about officials arresting and suspending a student who did not break any laws or violate any school policies other than possibly a rule about having electronic devices in the classroom. We're talking about whether this was an appropriate course of action for any and all students doing similar things, not just for one student you happen to dislike or mistrust because of his religion.

Suppose little Suzy Q. brings a case modded Walkman to English class and it starts making noise. Her English teacher sees the gadget and says "Good Heavens, Suzy, that looks like a shaped charge". The teacher confiscates the device and tells the Principal about it. It is quickly determined the device isn't a shaped charge, or any sort of explosive device at all. What do you think is the appropriate course of action here? What should the Principal do next?
 
Last edited:
angelo said:
So what if it was a real bomb.
Click to expand...

If the Principal or the teachers think it's a real bomb then they damn well better act like it! The should evacuate the school immediately and call in the bomb squad. If they don't think it's a real bomb but they don't want to take any chances (a sensible choice), then they should evacuate the school immediately and call in the bomb squad.

If they are certain it isn't a bomb, then they should try to figure out what it is and act accordingly. But even if they can't quite figure out what it is or why it was brought to school, they don't get to just make up a new policy on the spot. They are required to follow established procedures. If the only school rule that applies to the device is "electronic gadgets must be kept in lockers when school is in session" then the punishment for violating that rule, and only that punishment, should be imposed.

To hell with the authorities. How dare they offend the religion of pieces!
Click to expand...

To hell with religious bigotry and the selective suspension of civil rights it fosters.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom